Grey Knights Quick and Clean?

After a lot of searching and annoyance at getting certain questions answered I would like to throw up a quick and clean bit about some of the finalized details within the Codex I’m looking forward to and perhaps you should be aware of when facing them.

First, some of the things I searched far and wide for a clear answer on:

1. Are Interceptors (FA choice) Jump troops that can move 12″ every turn?

A:  Yes, they also have the Shunt 30″ once per game movement, other than this and 6 more pts a guy, they are exactly the same as a strike team, same psychic powers, options, costs .  An interesting note here is this in combination with a Grand Master giving them Scout.  Scout says you get a free move, Shunt is a Move.  There is nothing stopping you from Shunting as a Scout move.   Normal Strike teams may still deep strike though, which in the Daemonhunter codex was the only benefit a “Teleport Attack” unit gave.

2. Are the Inv Saves given by Staves in CC only?

A: Yes, they are also limited to one per unit.  A Force sword confers a +1 to inv. saves as well, but this again only works in CC.

3. Does the Dreadknight already come with 2 CC weapons?

A: Yes, he comes with two Doomfists which are Dreadnought close combat weapons, rules for which can be found in the big book.  This is actually a very odd situation he’s in akin to the IronClad’s Chainfist issue.  Stock he’s getting +1 attack for two same weapons and striking at strength 10 , add 10 points for a Thunder hammer and you lose an attack just to gain the little bonuses a thunder hammer gives, add 25 points for Great sword and you lose STR 10 and an Attack just to reroll all failed hits/wounds/AP?  The point costs are what bother me, I see benefit for the Great swords reliability factor but with the negatives it seems an unfairly priced change.  The TH is completely wack.  To me it seems the design was changed, either it wasn’t meant to have DCCW’s and would there get +1 attack but be at STR 6 by default, or the ranged weapons were meant to replace a doomfist which they don’t.  Now whether a DCCW is a special weapon is up for debate, but my take would be it is.

4. Psycannons are?

A: 24″ range, STR 7, AP 4, Assault 2 or Heavy 4, rending.  Range does not change with firing mode.  For modeling fun, this means an Assault cannon with Psybullet ammo, is EXACTLY the same thing on a vehicle, so if you have psycannon razorbacks, dreadnoughts, or land raiders from ForgeWorld you’re in luck!  Heavy Psycannon is the same except a single large blast.

So now some tidbits of thought I’ve had on all this…

Psybullet ammo is amazing….super fun stuff.  It can radically change so many units all by itself.  Obviously you will be seeing massed STR 5 Stormbolter fire quite often, the only disadvantage here being the GK player will be very likely to be fielding large units as the 20 pt price tag for these is the same if you bring a 5 man or 10 man but combat squads are available.  Other notable units for this upgrade are the Land Raider Crusader, which originally in the dev codex had to pay 20 pts for this, but now only pays 5!  The GK’s may be the premier codex for attaching extra storm bolters to their tanks =)

 Image from CastleCrashers

Advertisements

27 comments on “Grey Knights Quick and Clean?

  1. The dread knights fists do not grant it strength 10. Only walkers get strength 10 from dreadnought close combat weapons. The dreadknight is a montrous creature so all the fists do is make it’s st6 ignore armor

  2. The dread knights fists do not grant it strength 10. Only walkers get strength 10 from dreadnought close combat weapons. The dreadknight is a montrous creature so all the fists do is make it’s st6 ignore armor

    • well thats up for debate, of course the Dreadnought close combat weapon rule states walkers, can’t debate that; but we have a non walker being given them which happens no where else and clearly the rules for DCCW’s make no attempt to tell us they act differently in the hands of non walkers.

      Think for a moment about Bjorn the Space wolf dreadnought, he has a 5+ Inv. Save and Inv. Saves only work against wounds in the big rule book! If you deny a player Bjorn’s save because he doesnt take wounds as a walker then your pretty special, clearly this is a little murkier but you can see the connection.

      don’t forgot monstrous creatures also roll 2d6 armor pen along with ignoring armor.

      • Interesting comparison. I’m not sure if RAW folks would consider spanning across codices, but it seems like a valid point to me (of course, I’m more of a RAI guy myself…)

      • The GK codex im sad to say was not written well, there are many instances where things like stacking of abilities needs to be addressed by the FAQ

      • if you are talking about hammerhand and might of titans, the book specifically states that they stack…The only thing they need to faq on this book is that purgation squads cannot shoot magic bullets out of a rhino other than the 2 that can shoot out of the hatch…I already have people saying if they pass the psycic test they can shoot everyone from inside the rhino…

      • So does hammerhand stack with hammerhand?
        If i assault a unit with 2 units of purifiers, can they burn them twice?
        Falchions give what?
        if i assault a unit with 2 units, each containing Rad grenades, is that unit -2 Toughness?
        if i assault a unit with 2 units, each containing psychotroke grenades, is that unit effected twice?

        all of the above have RAW rulings people seem to take issue with from a RAI standpoint, i can see your a RAW gamer based on your comment about “i already have people saying if they pass the psychic test they can shoot….” so im sure your sure on each of these, but others are not.

      • -hammer hand does not stack twice
        -yes you can burn them twice if you take the test for each unit
        -falchions give you a 2nd close combat weapon, thats it
        -no, just like nids cant have +2 on their reserve, same as guard you cannot
        stack benefits except where it clearly states you can
        -Ditto

        Glad I could clear that up for you 🙂

      • if you are talking about hammerhand and might of titans, the book specifically states that they stack…The only thing they need to faq on this book is that purgation squads cannot shoot magic bullets out of a rhino other than the 2 that can shoot out of the hatch…I already have people saying if they pass the psycic test they can shoot everyone from inside the rhino…

      • There is no debate about it. Read the big red rule book page 73. It says a dreadnought close combat weapon is a power weapon that doubles the strength of a walker to a maximum of 10.

        A dreadnought is a walker as per each codex they appear in therefore its strength is doubled to a max of 10. the Dreadknight is a monstrous creature, it just has really big arms. RAW is RAW.

        What is the point of the hammer, to stun a vehicle when it hits it with ST10 normally, plus 2d6 extra? GW is known for being pretty shoddy in the rule department but you’re stretching. There is no tournament in the world that would agree with you.

        As for your Bjorn example, Bjorn’s rules specifically say that he has an invuln save (similar to the raiders with flicker fields in the dark eldar codex) and codex trumps rulebook. The GK rulebook does not say that the DCCWs boost the DK’s strength to 10. On top of that remember that a walker can lose its DCCWs a monstrous creature would not be able to.

      • so Doomfists on a dreadknight are just really big arms i see it so clearly now, Raw is Raw makes perfect sense i totally forgot that.

        GW just gave the Dreadknight something it can’t use because they were to lazy to come up with another word for fist and already had one to copy and paste in the codex, which is totally different then how they gave Bjorn an inv save!

        man how could anyone see anything worth debating about here it’s all so clear now!

      • ill agree they were too lazy on their wording here, but it clearly states in
        the BRB, Walkers double their strength to a max of 10…It does not say
        Monstrous creatures do…

        This is not the 1st time GW has been lazy. What would be the point of the
        hammer? Lower Monstrous creatures I to 1, while the dreadknight is swinging
        1st to begin with? shaking a land raider while the thing is hitting at S10
        and 2d6 pen anyways?

        Do you really need to win a game that much that you would try to pull this
        on someone?

      • I think you two have officially reached the “agree to disagree” stage. You both make good points, but the fact that you don’t agree is exactly why the RAI vs RAW argument exists in the first place.

        At least we can agree that GW screwed up on the wording, and really shouldn’t have called them dreadnought close combat weapons. Hopefully the FAQ clears it up when they get around to publishing one.

  3. Nice summary on some of the nitty-questions roaming out there. Any clue on the Falchions? Do they give +2 attacks (+1 for being a pair and +1 for being Falchions?) or +1 only? So many arguments on the interwebs!

    • well RAW they give +2, you get +1 cause thats what Falchions do in their special rule, and +1 for having a “pair” of them per the 2 special close combat weapons in the rule book.

      That said…i won’t play it as +2 until GW says so, i can see the RAW could very well be wrong as the wording in the GK codex is very shady…

      That said! they are the most expensive option outside of the staves. Is +1 attack really worth 5 more points to a paladin then a Thunder hammer or I6 Halbred?…not to me, so that lends some strength from a RAI side of things.

  4. Um Rob…this wasnt really meant to publish lol i made this super long ago and now it’s kinda a silly post. I didnt think i hit submit?

    • Sorry, it was marked as pending, but I should’ve let you know when it was due to post. My fault. I could take it down, but it appears to be inspiring some conversation, so I’d rather leave it up, and if you have any major corrections to add, we can make another post.

  5. Interesting post (despite the intention for it not to have been posted) – please keep it up!

    For point 3, I suspect something different happened: the GW staff forgot the rules (as written), and because DCCWs are ‘always’ strength 10, they didn’t think that as the Dreadknight is a monstrous creature, the wording would imply something different.

    I know I forget rules all the time, and although I’m not payed to remember them, White Dwarf battle reports frequently show rules/army list mistakes by GW staff.

    I also struggle to believe that anything GW brings out gets a lot of playtesting. I don’t think it’s possible for one studio to do a lot without outsourcing, especially working to tight deadlines. As units without models (at least for some of the time) probably get played less than other units, that probably cuts down even further the design studio’s exposure to the ‘real world’ of actual games between players who weren’t involved in writing the codex and who might spot oversights like this.

    • Why am I (Angelic Despot) now appearing as Orientaldespot? That’s odd. It’s still me, but not my normal posting name… I don’t understand technology!

    • oh yeah i’m with you all the way. Imo a couple of things could have happened.

      1. Dreadknights were meant to have 2 CCW’s base, so they would have +1 attack and be Str 6 monstrous. this makes the upgrades of hammer and sword priced much better points wise, even more so because then you would keep your +1 attack even if you upgrade.
      2. Dreadknights were meant to swap a DCCW with a Ranged weapon, so if you buy a ranged weapon now you lose +1 attack, making the upgrade costs of the melee weapons a little more ….lets say reasonable, good is probably not the right word.
      3. It was typo’d, and it’s supposed to be Dread Fist, not Doom Fist…

      Who knows, hopefully an FAQ will clear it up. In the mean time the Dreadknight has not proven to be overly powerful even with base doomfists at Str 10, plus the sword looks super sexy!

  6. Interesting post (despite the intention for it not to have been posted) – please keep it up!

    For point 3, I suspect something different happened: the GW staff forgot the rules (as written), and because DCCWs are ‘always’ strength 10, they didn’t think that as the Dreadknight is a monstrous creature, the wording would imply something different.

    I know I forget rules all the time, and although I’m not payed to remember them, White Dwarf battle reports frequently show rules/army list mistakes by GW staff.

    I also struggle to believe that anything GW brings out gets a lot of playtesting. I don’t think it’s possible for one studio to do a lot without outsourcing, especially working to tight deadlines. As units without models (at least for some of the time) probably get played less than other units, that probably cuts down even further the design studio’s exposure to the ‘real world’ of actual games between players who weren’t involved in writing the codex and who might spot oversights like this.

Have something to add?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s