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 guess this is a wait for the 'faq' jobby, but interesting to hear from those who have delt with things likes this before if it generally gets ruled in favour of the relic.

So:
New knight despoiler you get an extra attack IF it is armed with a thunderstrike gauntlet and reaper chainsword
New knight rampager you get extra hits if you roll a 6 to hit with a thunderstrike gauntlet or reaper chainsword

if i take the 'gauntlet of ascension' relic which replaces the thunderstrike guantlet i'm guess currently by RAW
despoiler losses his bonus attack (this isnt an issue for gallants with the ravager for imp as they have base 5 attacks)
rampager only gets his exploding 6's if using his chainsword.

Its actually a pretty 'meh' nerf to taking this relic... ye likley gonna wanna put it on a choppy knight but it nerfs them hard.

One that’s pretty clear to see the intent of, and if anything like the Russ turret weapon Relic it’ll be FAQ’d quick smart. Won’t stop people proclaiming “CorReCt! It Is A uSeLeSs RelIc!” until then mind.

 Latro_ wrote:
So i guess this is a wait for the 'faq' jobby, but interesting to hear from those who have delt with things likes this before if it generally gets ruled in favour of the relic.

So:
New knight despoiler you get an extra attack IF it is armed with a thunderstrike gauntlet and reaper chainsword
New knight rampager you get extra hits if you roll a 6 to hit with a thunderstrike gauntlet or reaper chainsword

if i take the 'gauntlet of ascension' relic which replaces the thunderstrike guantlet i'm guess currently by RAW
despoiler losses his bonus attack (this isnt an issue for gallants with the ravager for imp as they have base 5 attacks)
rampager only gets his exploding 6's if using his chainsword.

Its actually a pretty 'meh' nerf to taking this relic... ye likley gonna wanna put it on a choppy knight but it nerfs them hard.

Yes, you don't get the extra hits and the relic doesn't explode on a 6.

Its ridiculous and hilarious that GW never learns from their mistakes. This happened with the hammer of sunderance as well, not that long ago. RAW it didnt work with grinding advance. They FAQed it later, now it works.

 p5freak wrote:
Its ridiculous and hilarious that GW never learns from their mistakes. This happened with the hammer of sunderance as well, not that long ago. RAW it didnt work with grinding advance. They FAQed it later, now it works.

Because of this, you can safely assume that the gauntlet is going to be corrected as well.

Don't forget your knight can summon too because GW can't figure out how keywords work 2 years later.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Its ridiculous and hilarious that GW never learns from their mistakes. This happened with the hammer of sunderance as well, not that long ago. RAW it didnt work with grinding advance. They FAQed it later, now it works.

Because of this, you can safely assume that the gauntlet is going to be corrected as well.

Don't forget your knight can summon too because GW can't figure out how keywords work 2 years later.

What makes you think summoning. Is unintentional?

 Stux wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Its ridiculous and hilarious that GW never learns from their mistakes. This happened with the hammer of sunderance as well, not that long ago. RAW it didnt work with grinding advance. They FAQed it later, now it works.

Because of this, you can safely assume that the gauntlet is going to be corrected as well.

Don't forget your knight can summon too because GW can't figure out how keywords work 2 years later.

What makes you think summoning. Is unintentional?

Summoning was always reserved as a psyker ability and the risk to it was you could loose your summoner. Knights can summon and absolutely shrug off a wound if they actually got one.

Will it be useful? No because summoning currently is super duper niche. Is it an oddity that a vehicle can summon? Yeah.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's also my own personal annoyance that after 2 year GW still is having problems like this with their keyword system.

 Stux wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Its ridiculous and hilarious that GW never learns from their mistakes. This happened with the hammer of sunderance as well, not that long ago. RAW it didnt work with grinding advance. They FAQed it later, now it works.

Because of this, you can safely assume that the gauntlet is going to be corrected as well.

Don't forget your knight can summon too because GW can't figure out how keywords work 2 years later.

What makes you think summoning. Is unintentional?

A chaos knight is a CHAOS CHARACTER, those can summon. Your screening unit has been killed ? Summon a new one

 Backspacehacker wrote:

It's also my own personal annoyance that after 2 year GW still is having problems like this with their keyword system.

I'm just confused as to what makes you think this is a keyword issue, as opposed to GW intentionally allowing Knights to summon?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I've just seen this is discussed in a thread in General too, and there was actually an FAQ for the Chaos Knights Index and it confirms it is intentional that Knights are able to summon. This is absolutely not a keyword issue.

just got the faq, it works as expected

didnt faq the despoiler with 2 weps thou, so not much point ever taking a despoiler with the relics... well worth the 15pts for the rampager

 JohnnyHell wrote:
One that’s pretty clear to see the intent of, and if anything like the Russ turret weapon Relic it’ll be FAQ’d quick smart. Won’t stop people proclaiming “CorReCt! It Is A uSeLeSs RelIc!” until then mind.

So everything exactly as I predicted then.

Why GW can't just write the rules properly instead of having to Special Snowflake FAQ it every single time is beyond me.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Why GW can't just write the rules properly instead of having to Special Snowflake FAQ it every single time is beyond me.

and still manage to miss stuff. All they need to do around faq time is scan this forum for twenty minutes....

As of right now, Summoning is still a Faction rule that CSM, Daemons, Ksons, and Death Guard have access to. It is listed in the section detailing Faction rules.

The CSM Summoning rule only requires a Chaos Character (the DG and TS are specific to their faction), and I havent checked the wording on the Daemons summoning, but it seems to me, you would need a CSM detachment, to gain access to the Summoning special rule that only refers to Chaos Character.

I'm all for Knights Summoning, but I see Summoning is listed in the same page as army specific Faction rules, and if the Summoning rule is not written in the Chaos Knights book, they dont natively have that special rule.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Stux wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Its ridiculous and hilarious that GW never learns from their mistakes. This happened with the hammer of sunderance as well, not that long ago. RAW it didnt work with grinding advance. They FAQed it later, now it works.

Because of this, you can safely assume that the gauntlet is going to be corrected as well.

Don't forget your knight can summon too because GW can't figure out how keywords work 2 years later.

What makes you think summoning. Is unintentional?

As of right now, Summoning is still a Faction rule that CSM, Daemons, Ksons, and Death Guard have access to. It is listed in the section detailing Faction rules.

The CSM Summoning rule only requires a Chaos Character (the DG and TS are specific to their faction), and I havent checked the wording on the Daemons summoning, but it seems to me, you would need a CSM detachment, to gain access to the Summoning special rule that only refers to Chaos Character.

I'm all for Knights Summoning, but I see Summoning is listed in the same page as army specific Faction rules, and if the Summoning rule is not written in the Chaos Knights book, they dont natively have that special rule.

What book a rule is printed in has no bearing on what units can use the rule. The rule applies to whatever the rule says it applies to.

The summoning rule is also not tied to the summoner it's tied to the summoned unit.

Demonic ritual is tied to a deamon unit, when you look up the demonic ritual it says any chaos character can attempt to summon.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Why GW can't just write the rules properly instead of having to Special Snowflake FAQ it every single time is beyond me.

Every time you write a post containing "Special Snowflake" GW adds a badly designed rule to the game.