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.

Very sure the 2 pts for Falchions is for the pair. Listing the price as 'per falchion' makes no sense as they can't be taken singularly in any form, and we've had this mistake before in a previous chapter approved.

Ancients can take a single falchion.

chnmmr wrote:
Very sure the 2 pts for Falchions is for the pair. Listing the price as 'per falchion' makes no sense as they can't be taken singularly in any form, and we've had this mistake before in a previous chapter approved.

Our Ancients disagree with this statement.

chnmmr wrote:
Very sure the 2 pts for Falchions is for the pair. Listing the price as 'per falchion' makes no sense as they can't be taken singularly in any form, and we've had this mistake before in a previous chapter approved.

The Tyranid Devourer with brainleech worms is also priced per gun even though it can only be taken in pairs. I think it's a new thing.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

chnmmr wrote:
Very sure the 2 pts for Falchions is for the pair. Listing the price as 'per falchion' makes no sense as they can't be taken singularly in any form, and we've had this mistake before in a previous chapter approved.

The Tyranid Devourer with brainleech worms is also priced per gun even though it can only be taken in pairs. I think it's a new thing.

Probably just future-proofing.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

chnmmr wrote:
Very sure the 2 pts for Falchions is for the pair. Listing the price as 'per falchion' makes no sense as they can't be taken singularly in any form, and we've had this mistake before in a previous chapter approved.

The Tyranid Devourer with brainleech worms is also priced per gun even though it can only be taken in pairs. I think it's a new thing.

If I'm not mistaken, an ancient can take a singular falchion

*reads the paladin ancient a billion more times in confusion*...

Wait... so the paladin ancient can't have a sword, but ONE falchion. And the extra attack from the falchion only counts if you're wielding 2... wtf.

chnmmr wrote:
Very sure the 2 pts for Falchions is for the pair. Listing the price as 'per falchion' makes no sense as they can't be taken singularly in any form, and we've had this mistake before in a previous chapter approved.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
I think it's a new thing.

Falchions have been listed individually since 8e came out. In the base codex it lists a single falchion (although it was 0pts, so that no one had to do any adding).In the 2019 MFM (where the points are updated), it lists "Falchion - 1".Note how it's singular, just like in this list.
For a while now, a set of falchions has cost 2pts. That's how it is in Battlescribe, that's how it is in the lists I write.

chnmmr wrote:
*reads the paladin ancient a billion more times in confusion*...

Wait... so the paladin ancient can't have a sword, but ONE falchion. And the extra attack from the falchion only counts if you're wielding 2... wtf.

Yup, welcome to weird rules. It might be too hard to wield a sword and a banner together? and since the falchion is smaller it must be easier to dual weild with a banner?? Idk, just a guess at their reasoning

chnmmr wrote:
*reads the paladin ancient a billion more times in confusion*...

Wait... so the paladin ancient can't have a sword, but ONE falchion. And the extra attack from the falchion only counts if you're wielding 2... wtf.

Well lore-wise makes sense as he is carrying a banner in one hand. How he would be able to wield 2 falchions then? Also, a nemesis sword apparently is in fact a two-handed weapon. That's why the GK has wrist-mounted storm bolters. In fact, he is probably the best warrior but he has the burden to carry the heave and cumbersome banner with the long list of all the deeds of the hammers of Titan meanwhile with his free arm he struggles washing the never born withs bursts of holy bolters and swing a humble but more manageable falchion when things gets personal. Is like Crowe who is relegated to use Antwyr as a blunt instrument instead, such a waste for who in theory is the best dualist in the whole chapter. But sacrifices need to be made to hold the line against the creatures of the warp and there are sacrifices that can only be made by the best warriors and the purest of the soul. Be grateful that the paladin ancient is wielding the banner for us. Thrust the emperor and the sigilite and remember, the emperor protects.

Game-wise is a bit of a waste as just for 1 pt we lose 1 attack. But at least they gave us the option to have attacks with -2 AP and D3 damage. Otherwise, his attacks would be 0AP and 1 damage which is much more meh.

Imao in 9th edition the main advantage of the banner is that it can take dominus discipline and is not an HQ. I guess also that if CC it becomes more important in 9th edition, and we should see if it will become yet, the +1 attack ara it might be a plus.

Banner of flame is still awesome too.

 Smotejob wrote:

chnmmr wrote:
*reads the paladin ancient a billion more times in confusion*...

Wait... so the paladin ancient can't have a sword, but ONE falchion. And the extra attack from the falchion only counts if you're wielding 2... wtf.

Yup, welcome to weird rules. It might be too hard to wield a sword and a banner together? and since the falchion is smaller it must be easier to dual weild with a banner?? Idk, just a guess at their reasoning

It's mainly about what could be modeled straight from the box. There are plenty of left-hand falchions but no left-hand swords. It's one of the small changes from 8ed and forward that's actually pretty cool.

1. Game-play: before 8Ed it always seemed a waste that while the banner bearer will grant and gain an extra melee attack - those attacks were never better than just punching his opponent with his fist. That added AP-2, Dd3 on all his attacks was a real buff to his model.

2. Lore-wise: A single falchion is our most compact melee weapon (and relatively the easiest to wield), and it makes sense that a twin falchion user would be the most capable of holding a banner in one hand while competently attack with his left-hand independently.

The only problem with Falchions in 9Ed...is that they are prohibitively costly now. Way too cheap at the beginning of 8Ed, but now way too expensive at the beginning of 9Ed! 4 points for 1 extra attack is criminal. Even a single Falchion cost makes no sense. Halberds have +1S, Swords have +1AP and they are free while one Falchion is TWO points?!

And if it does turn out that they will be half the price of what is leaked...that's still too expensive - again the straight up better Halberd / Sword is FREE, while 1 Falchion will cost you 1 point for being worse? They got it right at the end of 8Ed with Twin Falchions costing one extra point (for 1 extra attack). To make it the most balanced/fair in 9Ed it should be Falchion (single/pair): 0/1 point.

Hopefully a mass of GK players will politely and succinctly point out this problem, for the first round of FAQ, as GW will only make changes to mass agreements eg. so many proper emails and structured game data / battle reports from GK players over 2+ years gave us Tides / buffs etc in PA, whereas similarly weak armies like SW and DW were not as fervent in their feedback - resulting in minimal / lackluster PA rules...coming AFTER our tremendous PA buffs!

Well, I also think that we need a Chaplain Dreadnought.
Should be mandatory.

I finished kitbashing up an Inquisitorial Chaplain Dreadnought during quarantine and just found out they're being moved to Legends. I'm not surprised, but it does sadden me a bit.

hey all! Considering picking up Indomitus and was wondering what models (if any) I could actually use for Grey Knight purposes?

I might need to do headswaps and weapon swaps, but yeah, basically, would using the primaris army from Indom work well as a Grey Knight starter army?

If not, what chapter would you recommend I take to complement a gray knight army?

Neknoh wrote:
hey all! Considering picking up Indomitus and was wondering what models (if any) I could actually use for Grey Knight purposes?

I might need to do headswaps and weapon swaps, but yeah, basically, would using the primaris army from Indom work well as a Grey Knight starter army?

If not, what chapter would you recommend I take to complement a gray knight army?

I don’t think any of the models should actually work that well, if you want truescale GK then just basic Primaris could be kitbashed with the GK kits, maybe. The assault intercessors could potentially do with a bit of work. We don’t have bikes or storm shields, unfortunately.

For allies, anyone who can do snipers and/or artillery well.

So something like Iron Hands or Imperial Fists for allies then I would assume?

And yeah, I was thinking just doing straight up truescale GK, but it's a shame there would be so many models not getting any use still.

Hello fellow brothers, so im going deep on grey knights this edition.
Apart from draigo, voldus, dreadknight and 10 paladins.
What else i should be aiming at? I read a lot about termis as the troop choice but i see them like expensive primaris with 2+/5++.
So maybe better go with strikes..?
In that case what weapons should i buy for them?
Thx for the answers!

zantio wrote:
Hello fellow brothers, so im going deep on grey knights this edition.
Apart from draigo, voldus, dreadknight and 10 paladins.
What else i should be aiming at? I read a lot about termis as the troop choice but i see them like expensive primaris with 2+/5++.
So maybe better go with strikes..?
In that case what weapons should i buy for them?
Thx for the answers!

For a competitive army, Draigo, 2x librarian, Brother captain, apothecary (you can build all 4 of those with a single terminator box), 20 paladins, 20 strikes. After that, Voldus and Dreadknights are nice to have, but just buy whatever you like.

Seizeman wrote:

zantio wrote:
Hello fellow brothers, so im going deep on grey knights this edition.
Apart from draigo, voldus, dreadknight and 10 paladins.
What else i should be aiming at? I read a lot about termis as the troop choice but i see them like expensive primaris with 2+/5++.
So maybe better go with strikes..?
In that case what weapons should i buy for them?
Thx for the answers!

For a competitive army, Draigo, 2x librarian, Brother captain, apothecary (you can build all 4 of those with a single terminator box), 20 paladins, 20 strikes. After that, Voldus and Dreadknights are nice to have, but just buy whatever you like.

It appears that the 2-ranked list from Bournemouth GT is still a possible way to go.
How about smaller units of Paladins due to the new blast rule.

Blast does very little against 10 model units, and you absolutely need max models to take advantage of all the buffs.

Also, you need units of 3+ models to protect your characters, so 5-man units are very inconveninet for grey knights.

Seizeman wrote:
Blast does very little against 10 model units, and you absolutely need max models to take advantage of all the buffs.

Also, you need units of 3+ models to protect your characters, so 5-man units are very inconveninet for grey knights.

Seconded.
So we would still run 10 men Paladin squads.

But if a united of 5 strikes can do smite and get a justificar.. why go units of 10?

zantio wrote:
But if a united of 5 strikes can do smite and get a justificar.. why go units of 10?

Buffs are better on bigger squads. Psybolt ammo, transhuman, sanctuary, hammerhand, litanies, etc etc etc are all much more effective on larger squads.

You want to run at least one 10-man squad in your list to take advantage of these strats and blessings. Many GKs run two 10-man Pallies, or 1 of those and another block of 10x GKSS or GKI.

Based on the batrep from these Play testers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INizhyFSCiw&feature=youtu.be

GK and TSons will have a +1 Cast cost per extra Smite they do a turn.

 Waking Dreamer wrote:
Based on the batrep from these Play testers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INizhyFSCiw&feature=youtu.be

GK and TSons will have a +1 Cast cost per extra Smite they do a turn.

Well, that's bad.
No more extra treatment of GK and TS.

zantio wrote:
But if a united of 5 strikes can do smite and get a justificar.. why go units of 10?

Strike squads are better on units of 5, precisely for the reasons you mentioned (and because they fill more troop slots that way). Big unit of paladins are better because buffs are much more powerful on them, and the GK army works around those buffs. You are not buffing strikes so you don't want big units of them.

GK and TSons will have a +1 Cast cost per extra Smite they do a turn.

We really don't know that yet. They are just using the current rules in the video. Grey knights not getting a +1 to cast is a matched play rule, not a core one, so we will have to see how those are updated on day 1. These guys probably now nothing about those matched play rules (playtesters work on a need to know basis) and, even if they knew, they probably could not reveal them. Right know, there's no restriction to setting up reinforcements on turn 1, but I would not count on things staying that way. They'll also restrict smite to one cast per unit, probably. It's possible that they don't gives us the exemption to smite cost increase after all, but I would wait until we have the full rules before being alarmed.

Seizeman wrote:

GK and TSons will have a +1 Cast cost per extra Smite they do a turn.

We really don't know that yet. They are just using the current rules in the video. Grey knights not getting a +1 to cast is a matched play rule, not a core one, so we will have to see how those are updated on day 1. These guys probably now nothing about those matched play rules (playtesters work on a need to know basis) and, even if they knew, they probably could not reveal them. Right know, there's no restriction to setting up reinforcements on turn 1, but I would not count on things staying that way. They'll also restrict smite to one cast per unit, probably. It's possible that they don't gives us the exemption to smite cost increase after all, but I would wait until we have the full rules before being alarmed.

Well it's not completely certain (they admit that themselves), but these playtesters were playing with what they have gathered (discussions with other play testers) with what they believe was/will be rules as intended. Eg. Reinforcements from turn 2, 1 Smite per unit each turn, +1 WC Smite with each following Smite. So in just this one video they haven't been playing strictly RAW right?

Tabletop Tactics (another completely different play testing group), were playing TSons with +1 WC Smite as well. Again, it's not for certain but based on this info, it's more probable than unlikely.

Seizeman wrote:


We really don't know that yet. They are just using the current rules in the video. Grey knights not getting a +1 to cast is a matched play rule, not a core one, so we will have to see how those are updated on day 1. These guys probably now nothing about those matched play rules (playtesters work on a need to know basis) and, even if they knew, they probably could not reveal them. Right know, there's no restriction to setting up reinforcements on turn 1, but I would not count on things staying that way. They'll also restrict smite to one cast per unit, probably. It's possible that they don't gives us the exemption to smite cost increase after all, but I would wait until we have the full rules before being alarmed.

Very little we don't know. We know core rules, we know GT scenario pack, we know day1 faq's...Where that rule would logically be placed?

Oh and there is restriction on turn 1 and need to come on turn 3 latest or be dead. Those are on GT scenario pack that got leaked already.

I didn't realise the reinforcements restriction was in the tournament pack. There's always the chance that they forgot that rule will become invalid and they will fix it, but there's a good chance that we are stuck with a +1 to cast our smites. While it is a nerf for us, with the reduced army size, we'll rarely cast more than 5 smites per turn, which is still reasonable. However, doesn't this hurt thousands sons a lot? Specially when spamming rubrics looks like a pretty viable strategy.