PDA

View Full Version : Imp Knights - fun to play?



TheBearminator
06-12-2015, 19:42
I'm tempted to add an Imperial Knight to my Death Korps (Astra Militarium codex). Preferably a crusader because I think it's the best looking one. From what I understand it's also the most expensive one and one of the most competitive as well. If I finally manage to get there I realise it's not so much more to paint before I can add a Knight army to my list. Would be a nice bonus indeed.

But it seriously disturbs me that the models look so static. I could live with one robot with two feet flat on the ground. But three, or four? Are they difficult to convert into walking pose? And how fun are they to play? It's a pretty limited army I mean. Are you and your opponent still having fun after ten games?

Saunders
06-12-2015, 19:52
As far as I can tell. There is no easy way to repose the legs. The key is doing variation in the base.

TheBearminator
06-12-2015, 21:22
As far as I can tell. There is no easy way to repose the legs. The key is doing variation in the base.
Idiots. They redesigned the thing after a year and they didn't fix that. Or maybe they just added a sprue. I don't know. Sadly I don't like the slimmer forgeworld knights, they could have provided some variety.

MagicHat
06-12-2015, 21:59
They just added a sprue.

There is a guide here (http://www.thediceabide.com/2014/04/step-by-step-guide-to-reposing-knight-titan-legs/) on converting the legs though.

TheBearminator
06-12-2015, 22:04
They just added a sprue.

There is a guide here (http://www.thediceabide.com/2014/04/step-by-step-guide-to-reposing-knight-titan-legs/) on converting the legs though.
Thank you! Pretty decent guide. Gonna check it again when the time comes. May be worth it, or maybe not. Time is really the issue. As always. :)

Mandragola
06-12-2015, 22:52
I've converted a couple of my knights to walking poses. It actually isn't all that hard if you're experienced at converting.

The thing I found hardest was that the basic pose has the legs splayed way out to the sides. That looks weird for walking forward. What I did was to remove one of the rings of what look like Michelin Man tyres where the leg joins onto the waist. That does make it quite a job to fit the two pistons that connect the legs on - lots of shortening etc. You can see the results in the plog in my sig if interested - though I haven't updated it in ages.

totgeboren
07-12-2015, 12:33
And how fun are they to play? It's a pretty limited army I mean. Are you and your opponent still having fun after ten games?

I have personally never faced a full IK army, but I have never heard anyone say that even a single game where one side had only Knights was fun. To the contrary, lots of people seem to think that one knight is OK (depending on what army you face), but pure Knights seem to be rather unfun for all parties.

Though, two IK armies facing eachother could be pretty cool! :-)

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 13:03
I don't know whether playing with knights is fun, but they're very dull units to face.

It's a bit like in video games when the designers can't be bothered coming up with interesting bosses, so they just give a guy stupid amounts of health and immunity to anything that might make the encounter remotely interesting. So, all you can do is wail on them for a while till they unceremoniously drop dead.

Put another way, for such big, expensive models, their rules are incredibly boring and far too simplistic.

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 13:23
I sense a high concentration of negativitrons in the air. It's pretty much what I figured myself. I don't see myself having fun against a Knight player since so many of units can't touch them even theoretically. But I think one Knight could be fun as an addition to my IG.

Dreadknight
07-12-2015, 13:53
Although an IK is indeed tough to remove from the table, it's not impossible. And if you do, the opponent lost a major piece of his army. On top of that, Ik armies typically have issues with objective based missions. So don't only play to wipe, but play a good mission. This way it's balanced.

Also note that when rolling an explosion with an unsaved penetrating hit, the IK will loose 1+D3 HP's. This makes (multi)melta's really usefull against them.
Also, there gun arc's are quite limited. This results in some positioning experience of the knight player, and counter options in the way of deployment for yourself!

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 14:06
Although an IK is indeed tough to remove from the table, it's not impossible.

It's not about them being tough to remove, it's about them exceptionally dull because of how many rules they flat-out ignore. it's just a long list of:
"No, you can't do that to them."
"No, they're immune to that."
"No, you can't do that either."
"No, they're immune to that as well."
"No, those weapons can't affect them."
"No, they ignore the rules for that."
etc.

They're just big bricks with barely any connection to the actual mechanics of the game they're in. Almost as if they don't belong in the game and were badly shoehorned into it. :rolleyes:

They're also stupidly fast for huge, armoured monstrosities. Because obviously every single big 40k model GW makes must be able to have its cake and eat it.

Dreadknight
07-12-2015, 14:35
The same already is applicable to monstrous creatures, but indeed not like super heavies. On the other side, gargantuan's have the same issue. It's just how you want to play games. Sometimes, I play a game with my friend with only marines, while I also attend to tournaments where all the cheese is served. I get fun out of both games although they are completely different.

The drawback to a knight: use a droppod and strike a 10man marine squad with 2 meltaguns in it in the rear. Roll a double pen and explode for both. Then the IK player lost ~400 points to a squad of ~160...not so bad!
Same goes with my dreadknights in combat vs an IK: I can kill it in combat but pay almost have of the points!

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 15:40
It's not about them being tough to remove, it's about them exceptionally dull because of how many rules they flat-out ignore. it's just a long list of:
"No, you can't do that to them."
"No, they're immune to that."
"No, you can't do that either."
"No, they're immune to that as well."
"No, those weapons can't affect them."
"No, they ignore the rules for that."
etc.

Ah! That reminds me of the ridiculous skimmer rules from the years when I converted to 40k. It was just a never ending story of extravaganza.

-Wow. So your "tanks" can transport six Melta gun Eldar, are twice as fast as mine and ignore terrain all together. That's really neat. Have they got any armour?
-Better than your Chimera.
-Wow. Too bad you parked so close to my power fist sergeant. He's gonna eat you badly.
-It's ok, you need sixes to hit.
-What? Why?
-Because fast skimmer.
-Ah. Ok. Forget it. I'll take a shot with my melta gun instead.
-It's cool. I ignore penetrating hits.
-Pardon me. Why?
-Because skimmer.
-Jeez... Ok, so my total of 17 is...
-Still a glance. Take two dice and pick the lowest.
-Why?
Because Eldar.

Mandragola
07-12-2015, 15:40
I've played an all-knight list: A warden, Paladin, Errant and Castigator at 1500 points. In my defence, this was for the qualifiers to the UKGT after quite a long hiatus without playing, so I needed an army that would be really undemanding to use. I have plans to bring a proper army to the finals next year, and maybe even practice and stuff.

It was pretty good. The thing I liked most about the knights was the really quick games. The event was being held upstairs in quite a good pub in Brighton, and the rugby world cup was on. So I could finish my games fairly quickly (win, draw or lose), then go and watch some of the rugby. I caught the end of the game where Japan beat South Africa, which was great.

I played against:

A guy with 3 knights and an eldar aspect host comprising 2 warp spider units and some dark reapers. He won due to a lucky knight acheron killing 3 of mine (just the way it goes sometimes), and lots of LoS-blocking terrain making it impossible to engage the warp spiders. He had 2 objectives to my 1 at the end, but I'd have won if the game ended on turn 6.

A guy with 3 wraithknights and a windrider host. I got a bit luckier in this game and he didn't get any deathblows with his wraithcannons. I tabled him around turn 3.

Another guy with 3 knights and something else. I won this one, using lessons learned in game one, but can't seem to remember much else about the game.

A guy with imperial fists and no knights of any kind(!). This was actually a really nicely put-together list, with lots of firepower and nasty stuff like a whirlwind scorpius that ignored cover. I trampled all over it, very much like a bull in a china shop.

A guy with 4 knights, a lot like me. He had no castigator but two wardens instead. Kill points! He got a lucky explode result with his errant on mine but I was able to pull it back by charging my warlord against his, which I won and got warlord and linebreaker for. I could and should have won because I had my castigator a bit beaten up. If I'd had it flee from the wardens it would have got out of range and survived, but it gave up its kill point. Draw.

A guy with a wraithknight and a ton of scatter bikes. Son of the guy with 3 wraithknights. This time I didn't get lucky - first shot from the WK deathblowed my warlord - and not in a good way. The wraithknight lived a charmed life, chipping away hull points from knights so none of them could survive charging it. He was then able to grab all the objectives with his scatterbikes.

Anyway 3 wins and a draw were enough to qualify. I actually qualified by being one of the best-painted armies, regardless of game results, which was pretty cool. I didn't feel too bad about using the knights in a meta where everyone else was spamming them too. It did mean that stupid death stars weren't much of a thing for the weekend, though the heat was won by a guy running a bunch of flyers, who I never met.

I don't think I'd run the army in casual play unless an opponent really wanted to play against them. Knights are mean, and one-dimensional. It's the first time I've tabelled opponents without losing a model - which I did two or three times. But I had no answer to all the scatterbikes I met. I learned to deal with warp spiders after the first game: you charge them with a castigator. They bundle in at I5, do nothing, and get auto-hit and deflagrated at I2. Results in 0 warp spiders and feeling of satisfaction. I tried charging some with my paladin in game 1 and nothing really happened. I killed a couple and they hit and ran away, the gits.

Saunders
07-12-2015, 15:45
Imperial Knights don't really "ignore" anything, per-say. They have a directional 4++ with AV13/13/11 and 6 HPs. The only thing that's different is that Explodes! results do an additional d3 HPs instead of outright removing the model.

They're still vulnerable to the same weapons that an Ironclad Dreadnought would be, just takes more punishment.

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 15:48
Ah! That reminds me of the ridiculous skimmer rules from the years when I converted to 40k. It was just a never ending story of extravaganza.

-Wow. So your "tanks" can transport six Melta gun Eldar, are twice as fast as mine and ignore terrain all together. That's really neat. Have they got any armour?
-Better than your Chimera.
-Wow. Too bad you parked so close to my power fist sergeant. He's gonna eat you badly.
-It's ok, you need sixes to hit.
-What? Why?
-Because fast skimmer.
-Ah. Ok. Forget it. I'll take a shot with my melta gun instead.
-It's cool. I ignore penetrating hits.
-Pardon me. Why?
-Because skimmer.
-Jeez... Ok, so my total of 17 is...
-Still a glance. Take two dice and pick the lowest.
-Why?
Because Eldar.

Yeah, stuff like that really isn't good game design.

Out of interest, which edition was that in?


Imperial Knights don't really "ignore" anything, per-say.

So, if I penetrate them I can shake/stun them, immobilise them and/or blow off their weapons?

Saunders
07-12-2015, 15:50
Silly me, I forgot to mention the damage results.

Still, at the end of the day you're not going to destroy a vehicle through the penetrating hits table outside of the Explodes! Result.

The Skimmer thing was in 4th edition. I'D explain the details of it but that would require going over the damage result tables, which were much different then. Needless to say, there's a reason vehicles have hull points now.

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 15:56
Still, at the end of the day you're not going to destroy a vehicle through the penetrating hits table outside of the Explodes! Result.

But that's the thing - it would be nice if the damage you inflicted actually had meaning beyond hull points.

I mean, even if they don't suffer the full impact of the result, do they really have to be outright immune? e.g. couldn't Immobilised be some kind of movement penalty? Likewise, surely 'weapon destroyed' could still take out secondary guns, and/or inflict some sort of penalty to one of the main guns (e.g. -1S -1AP).

Hell, for a vehicle that massive, you could have a much more elaborate and interesting damage table. Instead, we just have the normal damage table, but 4/5 of the results are utterly pointless.

Saunders
07-12-2015, 16:01
The damage results are removing hull points, which is the ultimate objective.

They actually did have more elaborate damage results for super-heavies in the previous editions of Apocalypse, but they proved both exceedingly cumbersome and potentially crippling to super-heavies.

I know it may seem a bit off to have a Knight shrug off results from the damage table, but the line does have to be drawn somewhere because the last thing anyone wants to see is a lascannon blow the arm off a Warlord Titan.

<edit> worth mentioning that I'be never used an Imperial Knight before, but I do sometimes use a Revenant Titan.

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 16:05
Yeah, stuff like that really isn't good game design.

Out of interest, which edition was that in?
The last year of 3rd edition. Then came 4th and murdered all transports. Every time your transport got penetrated everybody had to get out and take a pinning test. Except if your transport was a skimmer of course, that couldn't be pinned. Made a lot of sense... :)

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 16:06
They actually did have more elaborate damage results for super-heavies in the previous editions of Apocalypse, but they proved both exceedingly cumbersome and potentially crippling to super-heavies.

With regard to being cumbersome, surely that's not unreasonable on a 400pt model?

The current rules just make them one-dimensional and dull.

SDKFZ
07-12-2015, 16:15
Gahh, you just made me remember why i used to hate playing against eldar :(

Saunders
07-12-2015, 16:17
With regard to being cumbersome, surely that's not unreasonable on a 400pt model?

The current rules just make them one-dimensional and dull.

For 8th edition, perhaps. 7th edition transformed psychic powers in to something more than passing a leadership test and being done with it, so who knows what they'll revamp next.


Gahh, you just made me remember why i used to hate playing against eldar :(

Be thankful if you did not fight a Dark Eldar wych cult in Raiders in 4th edition.

sturguard
07-12-2015, 16:21
They are also immune to most of the psychic phase.

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 16:42
For 8th edition, perhaps. 7th edition transformed psychic powers in to something more than passing a leadership test and being done with it, so who knows what they'll revamp next.



Be thankful if you did not fight a Dark Eldar wych cult in Raiders in 4th edition.
Wyches, those space elves in corsets that used to have a purpose until I painted mine up last year? Sorry. Another one of my sidetracks of bitterness.

Mandragola
07-12-2015, 16:44
I definitely agree that the superheavy rules are boring. It goes for all of them, not just knights.

It's particularly bad with titans. Titans in 40k have less-detailed rules than they used to have in epic. Back then you could pick what bit of a titan you shot at, hoping to blow off arms, immobilise it or get round behind and blow up its plasma reactor. Now they are just a big pile of hull points that can't be degraded at all until they explode.

totgeboren
07-12-2015, 17:08
The super-heavy rules and vehicle rules in 40k are pretty odd. You have to keep track of stuff like if one gun is blown off a Land Speeder, or if one buggy in a group of 3 has gotten a tire blown, but for the huge 400+ models that by virtue of being expensive mean you have fewer models, and so gives you the perfect opportunity for detailed rules, then everything is super-simplified.

It's like if they had the current rules for Meganobs, but gave Grots individual damage tables.

Saunders
07-12-2015, 17:11
They are also immune to most of the psychic phase.

Super-heavies are affected by psychic powers like anything else.

jeffersonian000
07-12-2015, 17:26
I've been fielding an Errant with my GK at 1850 and up, which fills the role of "super" NDK. I find it to be a blast to play (pun intended), and a challenge to play against. Versus multiple Knights? I play the mission. If I played multiple Knights? I'd play the mission.

Personally, I've been waiting patiently since 2nd to field Knights in 40k. Now I can.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 17:28
Super-heavies are affected by psychic powers like anything else.

Like Invisibility. :eyebrows:


Also, it was mentioned earlier that a lascannon blowing the arm off a titan was silly, could someone explain why? I mean, it seems no more silly than a lascannon blowing up a land raider or such.

sturguard
07-12-2015, 17:31
Super-heavies are affected by psychic powers like anything else.

Sure they are, but the majority of witchfires and novas etc can't scratch them (whereas they have an effect against a model with toughness). I am not saying this is singular to Knights, it is the same with most vehicles, but the point was made, they are immune to alot of effects, and this was a simple side bar. Not to mention when facing an army of knights, every bolter in your army is useless as they are immune to small arms fire.

aprilmanha
07-12-2015, 17:32
Also, it was mentioned earlier that a lascannon blowing the arm off a titan was silly, could someone explain why? I mean, it seems no more silly than a lascannon blowing up a land raider or such.

Because its MY 400pts model and it should be immune to getting hurt! I paid enough money to be allowed to win the game! >:(

Saunders
07-12-2015, 18:34
For the same reason that a lasgun won't even penetrate conventional vehicles. The level of protection and system redundancies would make that kind of catastrophic damage a fluke as opposed to the standard. If you're looking for something akin to a lascannon versus a land raider, a turbo-laser versus a titan would be a better analogy, and in that case the turbo-laser is more liable to slag a smaller Titan.


Sure they are, but the majority of witchfires and novas etc can't scratch them (whereas they have an effect against a model with toughness). I am not saying this is singular to Knights, it is the same with most vehicles, but the point was made, they are immune to alot of effects, and this was a simple side bar. Not to mention when facing an army of knights, every bolter in your army is useless as they are immune to small arms fire.

In that case, you could make the same argument for anything with an AV. It's not exactly an advantage unique to super-heavies. Of course, your comment regarding psychic powers has amusingly crossed over in to another debate of gargantuan creatures versus super-heavy vehicles, in that gargantuan creatures are still subjected to any psychic powers that work off of toughness or leadership... so it's less a matter of super-heavies versus conventional, and more a matter of toughness models vs armor value.

On a related note, that's also an amusing point to bring up because Telepathy, Biomancy, and Divination are the popular psychic disciplines are popular right now. Telepathy, the most popular by far, is not at all geared towards damaging vehicles. Telekinesis, which hardly anyone ever takes, has multiple powers capable of taking hull points off the heaviest of vehicles.

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 18:53
Gahh, you just made me remember why i used to hate playing against eldar :(
-Oh, I forgot. You're likely to end up with a shaken or stunned result on the table. Like every time. I have a saving throw for those two.
-For that too? Why?
-Because Eldar. :)

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 18:53
The level of protection and system redundancies would make that kind of catastrophic damage a fluke as opposed to the standard.

Who said anything about it being the standard?

I don' mind it being unlikely, but I don't see why it can't be possible.

Also, there's certainly no evidence of all this supposed protection. As far as I can see their arms have virtually no armour (same goes for IKs). Not only that, but there's a ton of pipes and wiring that's entirely exposed. The only thing protecting those arms is Plot Armour.


Because its MY 400pts model and it should be immune to getting hurt! I paid enough money to be allowed to win the game! >:(

:D

Saunders
07-12-2015, 18:55
-Oh, I forgot. You're likely to end up with a shaken or stunned result on the table. Like every time. I have a saving throw for those two.
-For that too? Why?
-Because Eldar. :)

Actually, Spirit Stones were just the Eldar version of Extra Armour.

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 18:57
Good job GW turned it around and made Eldar balanced in 6th/7th. ;)

Saunders
07-12-2015, 18:59
Who said anything about it being the standard?

I don' mind it being unlikely, but I don't see why it can't be possible.

Also, there's certainly no evidence of all this supposed protection. As far as I can see their arms have virtually no armour (same goes for IKs). Not only that, but there's a ton of pipes and wiring that's entirely exposed. The only thing protecting those arms is Plot Armour.



:D

That kind of cascading damage is represented by the extra hull points stripped from any explodes! result.

I don't disagree with you regarding the Imperial Knight, but again they have to draw the line somewhere between conventional and super-heavy. I'm just trying to keep this discussion from turning in to pages full of "imperial knights are stupid. Also eldar." like every other topic about one thing or another seems to collapse in to these days. After all, this did start as a question of whether or not Imperial Knights are fun To play.

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 19:02
That kind of cascading damage is represented by the extra hull points stripped from any explodes! result.

Not it isn't - because until the last hull point is gone, the arm which just blew up still somehow functions perfectly.

I'd like to see a damage table that actually allows weapons and such to be blown off - not just a big pile of hull points that always functions flawlessly until the last one is lost.

OPULENCE
07-12-2015, 19:05
I have only played my knight as an allied detachment once and it was a lot of fun. My opponent was Eldar and we played 2000 pts. My Knight and a squad of Wolf Guard Termies in a crusader destroyed his entire flank whilst the rest of my army held up his other flank until my knight rolled up the rest, and my Grey Hunters dropped in to take the objective. I got lucky though as my Knight took out his Wraighknight and Fire Prism and then he didn't really have anything left that could really worry him. But it was pretty much what everyone else has said, he was a one man show and there is not a lot of scope for tactics other than point and shoot.

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 19:08
Actually, Spirit Stones were just the Eldar version of Extra Armour.
Are you sure? My memory may not be serving me right, but I seem to recall the spirit stones could downgrade stunned to shaken and shaken to nothing. I'm not certain. Anyway it was ridiculous the amount of buffs stacked on each other. Even today I think skimmers are being given to much, but it was a whole other story back then.

The least fun part of the entire game: Try holding a vital objective in the last round of the game against an indestructible flying tank performing a tank shock anywhere within 24".

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 19:10
Are you sure? My memory may not be serving me right, but I seem to recall the spirit stones could downgrade stunned to shaken and shaken to nothing. I'm not certain. Anyway it was ridiculous the amount of buffs stacked on each other. Even today I think skimmers are being given to much, but it was a whole other story back then.

Wasn't there also something that made you roll twice on the vehicle damage chart and the Eldar player got to pick which of the two results to inflict? I'm sure I remember something like that in 4th or 5th.

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 19:36
Wasn't there also something that made you roll twice on the vehicle damage chart and the Eldar player got to pick which of the two results to inflict? I'm sure I remember something like that in 4th or 5th.
That's just one of them. Pretty awesome stuff. I think it's called something something forcefield. I think it's pretty much the same today only more reasonably priced and as we've a lot less table rolls these days it doesn't ruin the game anymore.

Saunders
07-12-2015, 20:04
Pretty sure. The difference was that Imperial vehicles actually took penetrating hits, so it was less of a factor. Unless you're talking about a land speeder I suppose.

If you really want to talk about what got messed up in 4th edition, it was that when writing the vehicle rules for 4th edition (and trial vehicle rules before that) they forgot that eldar had a vehicle wargear item called 'holo-fields,' which were expensive for their bonus in 3rd edition and rather worthless in the next codex.

It was the 4th edition rules combined with it that created an abominal mix that is difficult for most players that joined in 5th edition or later to understand.

For the uninitiated, hull points didn't exist until 6th edition. In 3rd and 4th edition, there were actually multiple vehicle damage tables for glancing, penetrating, and ordinance hits versus vehicles. Glancing hits rarely destroyed a vehicle--the wrecked result was a 6, with no means of modifying the result. Penetrating hits, on the other hand, had a 50% chance of destroying a vehicle (4-6 wrecked, wrecked, explodes)

Now that's all well and good. The reason we don't have this today is because you could spend the whole game glancing and/or penetrating a vehicle and not destroy it, with some lackluster damage result rolling. The height of that was in 5th edition though, especially with relatively cheap imperial transports and passenger damage results that were no longer crippling (in 3rd and 4th edition, passengers didn't like to be in their vehicles when they would come under fire... something that improved each edition at least)

Now, there was a serious discrepancy between skimmers and ground vehicles that they attempted to remedy in 4th edition. That is to say, skimmers were generally a lot more expensive than ground vehicles. The upside of that was that skimmers (fast skimmers especially... though all skimmers were fast, until Tau and Necrons) moved further than ground vehicles. Skimmers also suffered an additional weakness beyond that though, they treared any immobilized result as a wrecked result if they moved more than 6". This made them a ton more fragile while still paying a premium for their speed.

4th edition rules made it so skimmers moving 12" or more reduced any penetrating hits to glancing hits. This really gave them the ability to weather incoming fire, with a catch--they still crashed moving more than 6" if immobilized, which meant that the 5 result (immobilized) on the glancing chart was effectively a wrecked result as well.

All well and good, except Holo-fields were not taken in to account. It's effect forced an opponen to roll 2d6 for dage results and take the lower result. Suddenly a 5+ became a 10+ to wreck the vehicle. Eldar vehicles also had access to Spirit Stones, which reduced most stunned results to shaken, and often removed shaken. So the vehicle was likely not going to get slowed down (a stunned result would stop it from moving for a turn and allow penetrating hits)

So needless to say, Eldar Falcons were very, very difficult to kill. Combine this with vehicles being very difficult to kill in assault (any vehicle was capable of moving more than 6", which was only hit on 6's in combat), and you had a vehicle with no reliable counter.

There were only two disadvantages; the Falcon with upgrades would cost at least 170 points IIRC, which was otherwise over costed and outgunned. Vehicles couldn't hold or contest objectives in 4th, so the best strategy was to ignore the Falcon until you had nothing better to shoot at. Naturally, this was very frustrating gameplay for anyone on the opposing side of a Falcon.

Ironically, this came at the tail end of an individual's reign (the fellow who wrote Chaos 3.5 and admittedly played Iron Warriors) who didn't want Eldar in 40k. It has been said it was his influence that pushed back a new Eldar codex to 2006, an 8 year gap. This extended the Falcon's reign as 'most annoying vehicle in the game' co-chair with the Necron Monolith for longer than it should have.

Another interesting note is that 4the edition Eldar came between Dark Angels and Chaos, right in the middle of the "bland" phase. Amongst other things, it changed holo-fields and starcannons (the other hated eldar weapon)


Everyone enjoys a history lesson, right? Apologies for spelling and grammar, written on a phone with a paranoid auto-correct

sturguard
07-12-2015, 21:04
My opinion is that Knights (as well as many of the larger units) make for lopsided games. Either you have the tools to deal with them and things go your way, or you don't (or your opponent destroys those tools before you can put them to work) in which case the knight is free to do his thing unimpeded. I have faced a full army of knights before at a tournament, and even though I managed a draw, I would never want to play it again. Although, I am a fan of the days when the carnifex was the biggest critter on the board and a unit if space marines were actually more than just an objective grabber.

Vipoid
07-12-2015, 21:17
Although, I am a fan of the days when the carnifex was the biggest critter on the board and a unit if space marines were actually more than just an objective grabber.

I miss those days.

Mandragola
07-12-2015, 21:38
Agreed. A space marine with a bolt gun ought to be something to be reckoned with in 40k. They are the iconic guys in the game but they are irrelevant - unable to even hurt many of the things they meet. Sometimes they are theoretically able to hurt the deathstar coming towards them but that's about it.

It's the one argument in favour of an AoS-style reboot of 40k. GW hasn't ruined that game with crap like invisibility - though of course many people would argue it started out ruined. At least all your toy soldiers actually do something. Nobody is just a scoring unit counter.

Mainly now I just like 30k. It's not without cheese of its own but everyone's kind of on the same page, working with the same (very large choice of) tools.

TheBearminator
07-12-2015, 22:21
Everyone enjoys a history lesson, right? Apologies for spelling and grammar, written on a phone with a paranoid auto-correct

Your memory in obviously better than mine Saunders. I realize now that I didn't fight Eldar until 4th. Thanks for the recap. :)

Mandragola
07-12-2015, 22:36
I have a slight beef with the history lesson actually. 3rd edition was the era of rhino rush. It's wrong to describe it as a time when it was bad to be in a rhino. Rhinos were absolutely the place to be in 3rd edition.

4th changed all that, by not letting you charge out of rhinos any more, and all kinds of other bad things for tanks. And Eldar have had broken skimmers ever since the book of army lists that came with the 3rd edition boxed set, which gave them armour 14 wave serpents.

Saunders
07-12-2015, 23:05
You are correct, I should say that 3rd edition was a bad time to remain in a transport. It was a great time to get out of transports to get a first turn charge.

I picked up eldar after the codex release so I could be wrong, but wasn't the wave serpent AV14 in 2nd edition? In the 3rd edition codex, it actually wasn't very good for the reasons above and below (it was about x3 the cost of a rhino and no better at its job)

Okuto
07-12-2015, 23:25
Is it fun to play? Sure for you, for the bloke on the other end, I'm not sure. ;)

I say if you're dead set on getting a knight army go for it, you should play what you please. Just understand that some people will not play against it and that's ok. There's a guy in my group who plays knights and while hes a cool dude, I have and likely will never play against him(unless he finally commits to that 30k Iron hands force). Not just because I dislike knights but also because fluff-wise my army wouldn't be dumb enough to pick a fight with knights:D they'd run the heck away.

I've played against 1 knight but even then I never liked it. Frankly I like my list the way it is and feel like I have to go way out of my way to kill one of those things. Its a silly thing to complain about I know(just change your list you whining git:evilgrin: I hear ya) but I just rather just sit out of the fight then put my guys on the table.

AngryAngel
08-12-2015, 00:07
I don't know whether playing with knights is fun, but they're very dull units to face.

It's a bit like in video games when the designers can't be bothered coming up with interesting bosses, so they just give a guy stupid amounts of health and immunity to anything that might make the encounter remotely interesting. So, all you can do is wail on them for a while till they unceremoniously drop dead.

Put another way, for such big, expensive models, their rules are incredibly boring and far too simplistic.

Agree completely. They have never gotten the vehicle units 100% and just went full lazy for super heavies.

Losing Command
08-12-2015, 08:24
So far I find IK's not exciting at all, either using one myself or facing one. With very few things being able to limit its effectiveness untill it goes -!KABLAM!-, it is one of the most point-and-click units in 40k.

sturguard
08-12-2015, 20:32
And the fact that just when you finally destroy it, you are likely to lose other units in the explosion is wrong. I somehow doubt they incorporated that into the point cost when determining the point value.

Vipoid
08-12-2015, 20:42
And the fact that just when you finally destroy it, you are likely to lose other units in the explosion is wrong. I somehow doubt they incorporated that into the point cost when determining the point value.

The fact that it always explodes seems really off to me. Especially since the bloody things can't explode from a penetrating hit, like every other vehicle.

For me, it's really immersion-breaking when this thing can absorb 2 penetrating hits from meltaguns and still function perfectly, but then explode because a multilaser chipped its paintwork. :eyebrows:

popisdead
08-12-2015, 21:08
Are you and your opponent still having fun after ten games?

There is a local who spent a while converting his up. It's a fun challenge (unless you play Eldar) to fight against and our games are always a blast.

Neither of us are dicks so that goes a long way to always having fun games and I always enjoy seeing his knight fielded (I picked one up myself as the kit stands out so much).

There is a local who runs 3 and has made a name for himself as both,.. someone no one wants to play and a person who made the 3 Knight army unfun to play against.

It's up to your local group.

daveNYC
08-12-2015, 21:59
Big thing is there's a big difference between 'knight' and 'knights'. As one part of an army it is something that can be dealt with, as the only thing in the army, you either have enough AT for the job (which probably won't be much fun for the knight player) or you get to spend quality time scooting around hoping you can get points while removing models. Adding one to DKoK probably won't be too horrible, since at least your opponent would be able to amuse himself killing the squishy bits of your army.

Spiney Norman
08-12-2015, 23:02
You are correct, I should say that 3rd edition was a bad time to remain in a transport. It was a great time to get out of transports to get a first turn charge.

I picked up eldar after the codex release so I could be wrong, but wasn't the wave serpent AV14 in 2nd edition? In the 3rd edition codex, it actually wasn't very good for the reasons above and below (it was about x3 the cost of a rhino and no better at its job)

Iirc the wave serpent didn't get a plastic model until 4th edition, before that it was a Forgeworld conversion kit (with the odd-looking flaps all along the bottom of the hull), so it's unlikely any effort was put into making it's rules competitive before that point.

insectum7
09-12-2015, 02:31
So needless to say, Eldar Falcons were very, very difficult to kill. Combine this with vehicles being very difficult to kill in assault (any vehicle was capable of moving more than 6", which was only hit on 6's in combat), and you had a vehicle with no reliable counter.


The rules were a little funnier than that. A (un-immobilized) skimmer always counted as moving faster than 6". So even a Monolith could only be hit on a 6 in CC, even though it could only move up to 6".


wasn't the wave serpent AV14 in 2nd edition? In the 3rd edition codex, it actually wasn't very good for the reasons above and below (it was about x3 the cost of a rhino and no better at its job)

AV pre-3rd was very different, armor values ran the gamut from 10 (bikes) to 25 (The Leman Russ Demolisher Turret, I think), with most AV hanging between 17-20ish. The 3rd Ed, BRB put the Wave Serpent at 14-14-10 to represent the field.

I always thought that the Wave Serpent was consistently better than the Falcon since it cost less, was tougher, had a single twin-linked gun (so you could fire on the move, and to offset the BS 3 of Guardians then), had greater transport capacity, and didn't take a Heavy Support slot to boot. They were more popular in my group than Falcons, for sure.

Karhedron
10-12-2015, 15:23
The 3rd Ed, BRB put the Wave Serpent at 14-14-10 to represent the field.
The 3rd Ed codex brought it down to 12-12-10, same as the Falcon. The original field rules were that any weapons > S8 were counted as S8 and you never rolled more than 1D6 for armour pen. Basically you could never damage on better than a 4+ (without something like tank-hunters).


I always thought that the Wave Serpent was consistently better than the Falcon since it cost less, was tougher, had a single twin-linked gun (so you could fire on the move, and to offset the BS 3 of Guardians then), had greater transport capacity, and didn't take a Heavy Support slot to boot. They were more popular in my group than Falcons, for sure.

Wave Serpents were good for sure but they didn't used to be able to take Holofields whereas Falcons could and potentially had more firepower to boot. Even today I still usually run a Falcon or 2 in with the Wave Serpents to transport a smaller squad like Fire Dragons while providing a bit more heavy firepower than a Serpent.

jeffersonian000
10-12-2015, 16:08
The fact that it always explodes seems really off to me. Especially since the bloody things can't explode from a penetrating hit, like every other vehicle.

For me, it's really immersion-breaking when this thing can absorb 2 penetrating hits from meltaguns and still function perfectly, but then explode because a multilaser chipped its paintwork. :eyebrows:

The Knight isn't "exploding", it's falling down, crushing anything under it.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TheBearminator
10-12-2015, 16:16
The Knight isn't "exploding", it's falling down, crushing anything under it.

SJ

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing to see here. Move along.

Edit: Big fat rulebook p 158. ©Games workshop.

ReallyUsefulSpaceMarine
10-12-2015, 16:17
IMHO I don't think that Imperial knight armies are fun to play but hey that's just me, it's mainly because one lot of lucky rolls can destroy a big chunk of your army straight away

jeffersonian000
10-12-2015, 19:55
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/10/5f648a0b0f48c1e5fa59baa4e4f7f7f5.jpg


Edit: Big fat rulebook p 158. [emoji767]Games workshop.

You quoted a rule, good for you! In context, its still the Knight wobbling and falling over with a resounding boom.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TheBearminator
10-12-2015, 20:05
You quoted a rule, good for you! In context, its still the Knight wobbling and falling over with a resounding boom.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well. Wobbling, falling over and blowing up majestically. I didnt have the time to write a recap of it. Now I can remove it again.

Vipoid
11-12-2015, 10:07
I didn't think it was possible, but I've found IKs are even less fun to play than I thought. Mainly because of Stomp.

I found yesterday that, if an IK is engaged with infantry, I'm not allowed to shoot it because I might hit the men who don't even reach its knees. It, however, can freely make stomp attacks against unengaged units up to 15" away. There is no middle finger big enough.

Grudgedesign
11-12-2015, 16:23
Yeah, that is just plain dumb.

IKs seem like they could be fun, but they have some really weird and badly thought through rules. I think I remember that Titans were pretty fun in Epic, why couldn't they be more like that?

TheBearminator
11-12-2015, 17:12
I didn't think it was possible, but I've found IKs are even less fun to play than I thought. Mainly because of Stomp.

I found yesterday that, if an IK is engaged with infantry, I'm not allowed to shoot it because I might hit the men who don't even reach its knees. It, however, can freely make stomp attacks against unengaged units up to 15" away. There is no middle finger big enough.
Wow. That is just... So not awesome.

Azazyll
11-12-2015, 17:49
That's definitely getting houseruled for me, for all superheavies, maybe all lords of war period. If a primarch doesn't call for a "nuke it from orbit" approach worth losing a few thousand grunts for, I don't know what would;)

Saunders
11-12-2015, 22:12
Alternatively, the Imperial Knight can't shoot when it is locked in combat, so that's a bit of a moot point. The fact that stomps can git unengaged units is so special-case that I think I've only seen it make an appreciabe impact a couple of times (in almost every case, the stomps are going against the unit engaged with the knight, and the stomps are only going to do damage outside of the unit if you have everything clustered around the engaged unit)

sturguard
11-12-2015, 22:17
You quoted a rule, good for you! In context, its still the Knight wobbling and falling over with a resounding boom.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If thats the case, it should be a random direction where a template is placed (like a giant falling) rather than it extending in every direction for x inches, surely the knight drivers can't predictably drop the knight where ever they want when it is blown apart? Or rather, it would force an initiative test or jump out of the way or be squished, rather than a toughness check or take a wound. In my mind I think it is more of an explosion and it seems to play as more of an explosion in game terms- the core goes nova and it blows up, catching everything in a --" radius.

daveNYC
11-12-2015, 22:24
Unless you want to imagine the Knight can manage to fall over in all directions at once, it's easier to think of it as an explosion.

Losing Command
12-12-2015, 11:11
Well knights are actually piloted by pilots who consider themselves nobles and all that. An Imperial knight throwing a tantrum after the paint got scratched doesn't seem that far-fetched when you think about it that way :p

Noodle!
12-12-2015, 11:18
How tall is an IK? I never felt it meshed with the look of the rest of my IG and I want to convert my own one from my billions of bitz.

TheBearminator
12-12-2015, 11:27
How tall is an IK? I never felt it meshed with the look of the rest of my IG and I want to convert my own one from my billions of bitz.
I think it's 6 or 6,5" tall. The base is 170 mm.

Noodle!
12-12-2015, 11:53
Oh, that's actually lower than I thought it'd be. Thank you!

Vipoid
12-12-2015, 12:25
The Knight isn't "exploding", it's falling down, crushing anything under it.

"Immediately after a Super-heavy vehicle loses its last Hull Point, it suffers Catastrophic Damage and explodes."

Emphasis mine.

Noodle!
12-12-2015, 14:58
The fact that it always explodes seems really off to me. Especially since the bloody things can't explode from a penetrating hit, like every other vehicle.

For me, it's really immersion-breaking when this thing can absorb 2 penetrating hits from meltaguns and still function perfectly, but then explode because a multilaser chipped its paintwork. :eyebrows:

The way I see it vehicles don't remain in tip-top condition as the hullpoints get chipped off and then suddenly explode. Hull points are pieces of the vehicle getting blasted off, structural weakening and what have you. In this case I can easily see it as the armor having been sufficiently blasted away to expose the power core or perhaps the ammunition storage. Even a multilaser could then, as the rules say, cause catastrophic damage.

Vipoid
12-12-2015, 15:02
The way I see it vehicles don't remain in tip-top condition as the hullpoints get chipped off and then suddenly explode. Hull points are pieces of the vehicle getting blasted off, structural weakening and what have you. In this case I can easily see it as the armor having been sufficiently blasted away to expose the power core or perhaps the ammunition storage. Even a multilaser could then, as the rules say, cause catastrophic damage.

But why can this not happen when it suffers a penetrating hit?

jeffersonian000
12-12-2015, 15:22
If thats the case, it should be a random direction where a template is placed (like a giant falling) rather than it extending in every direction for x inches, surely the knight drivers can't predictably drop the knight where ever they want when it is blown apart? Or rather, it would force an initiative test or jump out of the way or be squished, rather than a toughness check or take a wound. In my mind I think it is more of an explosion and it seems to play as more of an explosion in game terms- the core goes nova and it blows up, catching everything in a --" radius.
Did you forget that the Knight's cataclysmic blast scatters, "to represent the vehicle tipping over, or skidding out of control"?

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sturguard
12-12-2015, 17:50
Did you forget that the Knight's cataclysmic blast scatters, "to represent the vehicle tipping over, or skidding out of control"?

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My point was that your earlier response of

The Knight isn't "exploding", it's falling down, crushing anything under it.

Is merely your interpretation of it, not fact, but you stated it as gospel when others disputed that they didn't like the explosion result. The random template isnt so random, given a. the size of the blast, such that if a unit is in cc with it, most of the time they get hit and b. people playing multiple knight armies or even a single knight where the best use is to run him as quickly into your opponents lines to whack something with the d-weapon means that normally the blast doesnt hurt the owners forces. My original point was, given most of the time you hurt your opponent with the blast, it is a weapon in itself and should be accounted for pointwise (which it isnt in my opinion).

Or like Vipoid pointed out, let it blow up, fall down, whatever you want to call it on a penetrating hit, then you could blow it up in the owners deployment and kill some of his stuff.

Noodle!
12-12-2015, 23:15
But why can this not happen when it suffers a penetrating hit?
Are you asking why it can't happen right away? Because of game mechanics and balance. You can't look at a game like this which abstracts everything and expect "reality". Game mechanics trumps fluff and we have to make concessions for that, in this case I'm sure your imagination can fill in any number of things that happen instead.

And even though I know that's not what you meant it can certainly happen if the penetrating hit is the hit that takes the last hull point away.

Vipoid
12-12-2015, 23:18
Are you asking why it can't happen right away? Because of game mechanics and balance.

Yeah, that kinda invalidates your argument a bit.

jeffersonian000
13-12-2015, 02:42
My point was that your earlier response of

The Knight isn't "exploding", it's falling down, crushing anything under it.

Is merely your interpretation of it, not fact, but you stated it as gospel when others disputed that they didn't like the explosion result. The random template isnt so random, given a. the size of the blast, such that if a unit is in cc with it, most of the time they get hit and b. people playing multiple knight armies or even a single knight where the best use is to run him as quickly into your opponents lines to whack something with the d-weapon means that normally the blast doesnt hurt the owners forces. My original point was, given most of the time you hurt your opponent with the blast, it is a weapon in itself and should be accounted for pointwise (which it isnt in my opinion).

Or like Vipoid pointed out, let it blow up, fall down, whatever you want to call it on a penetrating hit, then you could blow it up in the owners deployment and kill some of his stuff.

The "random template" is random enough on such a large base that it is quite possible to miss everything, or to hit a Knight standing next to it.

And yes, the explosion is taken into account point wise, as the similar WraithKnight is 100-120pts cheaper without a potential D-explosion.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TheBearminator
13-12-2015, 10:02
And yes, the explosion is taken into account point wise, as the similar WraithKnight is 100-120pts cheaper without a potential D-explosion.


I'd say the Wraithknight is 120 points cheaper because GW needed to "balance" it to windriders and other units in the most powerful army in the game. So we can consider it a 120 point screw-up discount.

sturguard
14-12-2015, 00:56
The "random template" is random enough on such a large base that it is quite possible to miss everything, or to hit a Knight standing next to it.

And yes, the explosion is taken into account point wise, as the similar WraithKnight is 100-120pts cheaper without a potential D-explosion.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, your opinion. Whether the WK is balanced or not has no bearing on whether the IK is costed appropriately. I have never seen an army of Knights all bunched together where a template could scatter from one to another, typically, they have to spread out to claim objectives and there normally isnt any model out there that would require the attention of 2 knights.

Let's not pretend the majority people take Knights because they are "fluffy", knight are very good at what they do point wise, otherwise you wouldnt see them all over the tournament scene (not necessarily whole armies, but 1-2 as allies).

Sid Snake
14-12-2015, 01:38
Yeah, that is just plain dumb.

IKs seem like they could be fun, but they have some really weird and badly thought through rules. I think I remember that Titans were pretty fun in Epic, why couldn't they be more like that?

I can speak to this, having run through a 2nd ed Epic (Netepic) campaign with a friend recently. Titans and other Superheavies in that really are great fun, and the complicated damage charts with different hit locations and effects make those units characterful. Just as if you were watching a film and rooting for or against the big deathmachine, the tension of one little bit being shot after another, etc.

I could be wrong, but my impression is that sort of thing was ruled out as a design philosophy in the big jump that was 3rd edition 40k. It was seen as too slow and cumbersome. Which is understandable; the problem is, the new style 3rd edition brought in, didn't have things like Knights in mind (in fact I almost don't believe they've gone ahead and released 28mm scale models for them). Having Very Powerful Models without Interesting Complications leads to a dull game (imo)

wyvirn
14-12-2015, 17:46
But why can this not happen when it suffers a penetrating hit?

Maybe the Titans is equipped with a fail safe that will explode to prevent the salvageable wreck from falling into the hands of the enemy? I'm pulling that out of the air, though. I do think that the knights are too simplified for this game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jeffersonian000
14-12-2015, 18:52
Again, your opinion. Whether the WK is balanced or not has no bearing on whether the IK is costed appropriately. I have never seen an army of Knights all bunched together where a template could scatter from one to another, typically, they have to spread out to claim objectives and there normally isnt any model out there that would require the attention of 2 knights.

Let's not pretend the majority people take Knights because they are "fluffy", knight are very good at what they do point wise, otherwise you wouldnt see them all over the tournament scene (not necessarily whole armies, but 1-2 as allies).

Adamantium Lance (4" coherency), Tripartite Lance (4" coherency), Baronial Court (6" for Ionic Shieldwall benefit), and simply being in the same assault.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sturguard
14-12-2015, 20:46
Adamantium Lance (4" coherency), Tripartite Lance (4" coherency), Baronial Court (6" for Ionic Shieldwall benefit), and simply being in the same assault.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Citing a few rules which may or may not ever come into play during a game does not invalidate my statement. It's clear you like Knights, that's great, however, it seems there are just as many if not more folks in this thread that don't or feel their rules are extremely lacking and boring (and that's okay too).

insectum7
14-12-2015, 20:50
But why can this not happen when it suffers a penetrating hit?

It can happen. If you hit it with something AP 2 or AP 1, you can get a 7 on the damage chart and the Knight suffers D3 additional HP of damage, which may result in the Knight exploding. You can detonate the Knight in one hit after you've stripped two HP from it. (Always Meltas for going after Knights. The shock of a player losing a Knight to a couple solid Melta hits is great.)

I suppose it's not too difficult to come up with a reason for why it always explodes, if you want to. Say the explosion of a Knight is from a reactor containment failure. If we assume there's multiple redundant systems keeping the "plasma core" (or whatever) stable, maybe once the Knight is damaged enough, those containment systems start to break down. At some point it takes very little stress on the system to start a cascade that breaks down and results in explosion.

But you'd also figure that you could knock a leg off of it and watch it land on it's face. Oh well. Call it the AT-AT effect? Once it topples blasters blow it up in a couple shots.

Saunders
14-12-2015, 22:03
I'd say the Wraithknight is 120 points cheaper because GW needed to "balance" it to windriders and other units in the most powerful army in the game. So we can consider it a 120 point screw-up discount.

The Wraithknight is cheaper because stock Imperial Knights are closer to all of their weapon options wrapped up in to one package, which comes at a cost. A D-strength CCW, a directional 4++ versus shooting, and a powerful multi-purpose cannon (throw in a couple of lighter anti-infantry weapons in part to facilitate target priority) give it a number of tools to handle anything in an opposing 1500-2000 point force. Other than barreling in to generalist squads with stomp attacks and a dreadnought profile in CCW, the Wraithknight picks one dedicated role; anti-armor, anti-infantry with 5++, or added punch in combat with 5++. Picking one option removes the other two, and as a general rule the only thing the Wraithknight does better than the Imperial Knight is tank AP1 and haywire, though the IK has a couple noteworthy immunities (AV13 is harder to punch through than T8, for instance; Imperial Knights also laugh at Grav weapons, whereas Wraithknights are tabled by them)

That's why the Wraithknight is less expensive than the Imperial Knight.

But that conversation has been done to death, it's a bit of a moot point.

Noodle!
15-12-2015, 21:27
Yeah, that kinda invalidates your argument a bit.

Really, that's all the reply you're going to give? While I'm not claiming the balancing in this game to be perfect or even good, there IS balance. In the same way that giving the general direction to someone as "somewhere north-east" is a better direction than "walk around wherever".

That's how I justify my answer rather than being flippant.

sturguard
15-12-2015, 23:19
Really, that's all the reply you're going to give? While I'm not claiming the balancing in this game to be perfect or even good, there IS balance. In the same way that giving the general direction to someone as "somewhere north-east" is a better direction than "walk around wherever".

That's how I justify my answer rather than being flippant.

That's all the answer needed. You referenced balance in 40k, and there is none, players are now left to balance the game themselves moreso than ever. At one time GW had restrictions 0-1 on units, or tried to implement a % based system- all of that is gone, plus the fact you can take units from just about every other army book in the 40k universe even in a tournament setting. GW barely tried to balance a codex internally, do you think for a second they consider the other thousands of combinations from all the other codexes when they publish content?

Noodle!
16-12-2015, 12:48
do you think for a second they consider the other thousands of combinations from all the other codexes when they publish content?

No I think there's balancing. There's an established framework of rules which the designers work within and assign points. The balancing doesn't have to be GOOD but there is a chasm of difference between absolutely no balance and what we have now. I even gave you an analogue of my line of thought.

And obviously, and I don't see how this is something that is hard to grasp, the game system works with the game mechanics they've established in the rule books. Asking why it can't happen with a penetrating hit the answer would be "because these are the mechanics of the game". You can keep adding layers of rules or house rules, but that's the short and straight answer.

The first answer I gave in this thread was how I personally can interpret that game mechanic into something that would happen in the game worlds fluff and was wholly unrelated to the balance of the game.

jeffersonian000
16-12-2015, 23:53
Citing a few rules which may or may not ever come into play during a game does not invalidate my statement. It's clear you like Knights, that's great, however, it seems there are just as many if not more folks in this thread that don't or feel their rules are extremely lacking and boring (and that's okay too).

You said you've never seen Knights bunched close enough to be hit by an exploding Knight, and I pointed out four instances that do place Knight close enough to get hit by a bad scatter. Your anecdotal statement is easily proven to be just anecdotal.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wolf Lord Balrog
17-12-2015, 19:28
I miss those days.
Me too.


Words.