Grey Knights in 6th Edition

[Brother Maikel]

It says "you can modify any reserve rolls made this phase by +1 or -1" (emphasis mine).

Since the phase ends before your opponent's turn, the psychic power will have expired.

[saffo]

Great catch! Thanks for the good eyes. The other thing I noticed is that the Grand Strategy limits who you can use it on...so it appears no making my tank squadron a scoring unit, but making a squad of GK (of any flavour) is doable.

 

Edit

BTW they did FAQ unyielding anvil, "The nominated units can control objectives as if they were scoring units". It also says that vehicles targeted can claim objectives and that squads hit by this, who then combat squad out are both able to claim objectives. That actually goes a long way to validate the use of this to make GK forces allied into another force scoring units. Some people argued that the definition of allies of convenience would count against this power..

[Gentlemanloser]

can Grand Strategy override the Desperate Allies rule, and make your units scoring anyway? What if your primary detachment is GK and you ally in Orks/DEldar?

 

TGS: Codex Rule

Desperate allies/One eye open: BRB rule

 

codex > brb and takes precedence in all cases.

 

I'll not stop harping on about this, until gw wise up at just how powerful that tiny sentence on page 7 actually is...

[AnImA8]

To my knowledge this is not kosher since under the allies section, Allies of Convenience are treated as enemies for all intents and purposes. The BRB enumerates specifics like psychic powers, but these are just examples and not explicit restrictions on the preceding lines.

It doesn't change whether they can score or deny though. You can't join them or cast on them, but the units are still scoring and they're still part of your army. In fact, if they couldn't score then the section on Desperate Allies wouldn't have to explicitly call out as an addition to the restrictions on AoC that the Desperate Allies become non-scoring and non-denying.

 

Interesting, I didn't see that under Desperate Allies. So if I ally Guard, then not only are their Troops scoring, but that also frees me up to use some other part of Grand Strategy on them? Say Scout or whatever. Do we have a definitive answer on how that works for Platoons?

[Zeratul29]

Well since the everything is one entry as a platoon, then every squad that is part of that platoon "unit" would have that TGS ability, thats how I see it working

[facmanpob]

Here's something to throw out there ;)

 

The TGS rule says: "At the start of the game....... the Grand Master can assign special battlefield roles to units under his command." (Emphasis is mine)

 

Since the orignal question regarding TGS was from a Guard player using GK as allies, what do people think about using TGS on the Guard section of the army, as the Grand Master is not in command of the primary detachment, but is simply an ally. As such, the Guardsmen are not "under his command". Any thoughts? :lol:

 

[EDIT - reason for question is that I'm thinking of using allied GK]

[jeffersonian000]

Here's something to throw out there :teehee:

 

The TGS rule says: "At the start of the game....... the Grand Master can assign special battlefield roles to units under his command." (Emphasis is mine)

 

Since the orignal question regarding TGS was from a Guard player using GK as allies, what do people think about using TGS on the Guard section of the army, as the Grand Master is not in command of the primary detachment, but is simply an ally. As such, the Guardsmen are not "under his command". Any thoughts? ;)

 

[EDIT - reason for question is that I'm thinking of using allied GK]

 

I was under this impression after I first read the Allies rules. Since GKs are never Battle Brothers, all allied units are treated as enemies the cannot be attacked, nor can any psychic powers be shared. And I'm pretty sure wargear and special abilities shouldn't be shared, either, yet the rules don't specifically cover that restriction. Essentially, if you are allying with the GK, it is only because you are considered by them at that moment to be the lesser evil. The GK hold their cards close and keep an eye on their "allies", going so far as to ignore the actual enemy just to maintain vigil over their "friends". That is not happy making. I don't see how GK can use their abilities on allies, given how the bulk of our special rules are written. Yes, I'm sure there are loopholes to be exploited, but the spirit seems to point to a very non-sharing association.

 

SJ

[Gentlemanloser]

"Under his command"

 

Totally fluff line.

 

If you can point me to any rule that explains which units are under the GKGM 'command', I'll happily change my stance.

[jeffersonian000]

"Under his command"

 

Totally fluff line.

 

If you can point me to any rule that explains which units are under the GKGM 'command', I'll happily change my stance.

 

Page 108, BRB, "Choosing Your Army"

 

SJ

[Brother Maikel]

Here's something to throw out there ;)

 

The TGS rule says: "At the start of the game....... the Grand Master can assign special battlefield roles to units under his command." (Emphasis is mine)

 

Since the orignal question regarding TGS was from a Guard player using GK as allies, what do people think about using TGS on the Guard section of the army, as the Grand Master is not in command of the primary detachment, but is simply an ally. As such, the Guardsmen are not "under his command". Any thoughts? :)

 

[EDIT - reason for question is that I'm thinking of using allied GK]

 

I was under this impression after I first read the Allies rules. Since GKs are never Battle Brothers, all allied units are treated as enemies the cannot be attacked, nor can any psychic powers be shared. And I'm pretty sure wargear and special abilities shouldn't be shared, either, yet the rules don't specifically cover that restriction. Essentially, if you are allying with the GK, it is only because you are considered by them at that moment to be the lesser evil. The GK hold their cards close and keep an eye on their "allies", going so far as to ignore the actual enemy just to maintain vigil over their "friends". That is not happy making. I don't see how GK can use their abilities on allies, given how the bulk of our special rules are written. Yes, I'm sure there are loopholes to be exploited, but the spirit seems to point to a very non-sharing association.

 

SJ

 

That's the best indication I've seen that this rule will probably be FAQ'd to only apply to C:GK units. However, there are plenty of times in the fluff when a small GK contingent took control of a large force of guardsmen or other Imperial units for a particular battle. Game mechanically that might be best represented by a primary detachment of guardsmen with an allied detachment of GK. Since there is no way within the game to determine what units are "under his command", the best we can do is follow the next sentence: "Roll a D3 and choose that many ... units in your army". Since both detachments are part of your army, both are eligible for Grand Strategy (for the moment).

 

GL, it looks like Desperate Allies (and other non-scoring units for that matter) that get given Unyielding Anvil would be able to control objectives, but would count as neither Scoring nor Denial units. UA (now) says "The nominated units can control objectives as if they were scoring units" but does not make them Scoring or Denial. So they'd count for Emperor's Will or The Scouring, but not for Linebreaker, and might not be able to pick up the Relic since its not an Objective in the normal sense (it is a marker, and isn't controlled or contested).

 

Interestingly, this may also prevent GK or allied walkers with GS:UA from contesting objectives, since denial units are not defined as a subset of scoring units.

[saffo]

That's the best indication I've seen that this rule will probably be FAQ'd to only apply to C:GK units.

This rule was FAQ'ed and it actually has 3 entries in the GK FAQ. The specifically did not change the wording dealing with this confusing issue and they did not clarify what "under your command" means. They also didn't further limit the rule, they only expanded it to explain how it should be used on vehicles and such. If they are going to FAQ it to such an extent, surely the currently accepted usages are ok?

 

Edit: Also, doesn't allies of convenience (don't have my rule book on me at work) have some verbiage about the allies "in your army" being scoring...or maybe its that they are part of your army or some such. In desperate allies, I think it doesn't say anything about "in your army". Again, I don't have the rule book with me, so I will look tonight but if you happen to have it might be worth commenting on the differences in that context.

[Brother Maikel]

That's the best indication I've seen that this rule will probably be FAQ'd to only apply to C:GK units.

This rule was FAQ'ed and it actually has 3 entries in the GK FAQ. The specifically did not change the wording dealing with this confusing issue and they did not clarify what "under your command" means. They also didn't further limit the rule, they only expanded it to explain how it should be used on vehicles and such. If they are going to FAQ it to such an extent, surely the currently accepted usages are ok?

 

*shrug* I have no problem with the current usages. I actually find them more interesting from a list-building perspective, and feel that they fall completely within RAW.

 

Just a note though, I believe the entries in the FAQ section of the GK Codex Update v1.1 are leftover from 5th edition documents. Plus, there are plenty of other Codices that have had Amendments and Errata further clarified, expanded and even reversed. For instance, Shrike of C:SM used to confer Infiltrate on any unit he joined (per Update 1.0), but was Amended in 1.1 to confer that only on C:SM units (which irritated me: I really wanted some infiltrating Death Company for my Blood Angels).

 

Forgive my cynicism, but I find it far more likely that GW failed at rules-writing than that they intended Grand Strategy to apply to Dark Eldar or Orks.

[Gentlemanloser]

Page 108, BRB, "Choosing Your Army"

 

SJ

 

Nope, nothing on page 108.

 

Forgive my cynicism, but I find it far more likely that GW failed at rules-writing than that they intended Grand Strategy to apply to Dark Eldar or Orks.

 

Like cybork bodies? :)

 

gw were able to FAQ litanies of hate and bangle fnp bubbles, but weren't able to get it right for TGS? Oversight, or they just don't think it's abusable 9or worth of abuse).

[thade]

Perhaps they believe that players will actually heed RAW such as The Most Important Rule and Spirit of the Game. <3

[saffo]

Perhaps they believe that players will actually heed RAW such as The Most Important Rule and Spirit of the Game. <3

"Hey your not forging the narrative!"

 

So now that I can make my NDK scoring... I was thinking about using one to handle a situation where my opponent camps a thunderfire cannon and snipers in a bolstered ruin which, in some cases, he gets 2+ cover save. Additionally, I want something that can quickly get up the field and lay some waist delaying them in their backfield while I pound things out with artillery. To that end, I was thinking about using a NDK with a heavy flamer, teleporter and a greatsword (4 S10 attacks at AP2) in CC. What are your thoughts and am I playing it foolish by not taking the more shooty options that are so much more common?

[Gentlemanloser]

Perhaps they believe that players will actually heed RAW such as The Most Important Rule and Spirit of the Game. <3

 

I disagree. ;)

 

And on a 4+, i'm right.

 

unless it's my turn. in which case i'm right anyway.

 

<3 cop out "Golden rules".

 

To that end, I was thinking about using a NDK with a heavy flamer, teleporter and a greatsword (4 S10 attacks at AP2) in CC. What are your thoughts and am I playing it foolish by not taking the more shooty options that are so much more common?

 

No one runs a shooty NDK. Why would you?

 

It's either;

 

Bare (to save points)

H incinerator (default 'cheap' loadout)

PT, H incinerator, Greatsword (Full Monty! Jump, Burn, Smash)

[AnImA8]

PT, H incinerator, Greatsword (Full Monty! Jump, Burn, Smash)

 

Have you used this? And if so how was it? I've always wanted to try it but the points for that puppy have always deterred me :/

[Gentlemanloser]

Pure gravy. It makes folks cry and whine about GK being op or some such. ;)

[spartan249]

It's way too expensive IMO. Even the incinerator/teleporter DK simply takes up too much space for me to be happy with. In derp games, it can work magic, but most cases see it die before doing all that much damage.

[Blackwinter]

Perhaps they believe that players will actually heed RAW such as The Most Important Rule and Spirit of the Game. <3

"Hey your not forging the narrative!"

 

So now that I can make my NDK scoring... I was thinking about using one to handle a situation where my opponent camps a thunderfire cannon and snipers in a bolstered ruin which, in some cases, he gets 2+ cover save. Additionally, I want something that can quickly get up the field and lay some waist delaying them in their backfield while I pound things out with artillery. To that end, I was thinking about using a NDK with a heavy flamer, teleporter and a greatsword (4 S10 attacks at AP2) in CC. What are your thoughts and am I playing it foolish by not taking the more shooty options that are so much more common?

 

Nemesis greatsword is AP2? Where does it wright?

[Gentlemanloser]

You never, ever, use the Greatsword.

 

You use two doomfists.

 

You get the rerolls from the Greatsword just for having it, you never need swing it. ;)

 

but most cases see it die before doing all that much damage.

 

How?

 

Your ndk getting ganked by Drop Pod sternguard? warp quake.

 

Getting sniped? Solar flare. >^_^

 

If only the B&C allowed ally discussions. the joys of some codexes.

 

/wistful sigh

 

Edit: I don't run mine solo. if you're sticking a solo Ndk in, just keep him bare. 130 points for one of the best MCs in the game is a steal.

 

If you PT/GS one, stick a second in.

 

Or at the very least some Interceptors (or allied jump infantry. but they can't keep up with the Shunt)

 

The ndK has T6 and tDA saves. He's very durable.

[spartan249]

Lascannons, plasma, terminators, or the interminable tarpit of bodies are the usual suspects. I don't pull punches much, and neither do my usual opponents. DKs are a liability in most of my matches, so they stay home most cases now.

[Gentlemanloser]

PT NDKs outrange Terminators. And the H flamer deals with large crappy tarpit units.

 

Lascannons still aren't run in numbers.

 

Plasma is a killer though.

[Kay]

On the subject on GM vs captain, I find that paying for those 25p to make an interceptor squad, a DK or some pallys scoring (without needing Draigo) scoring is huge.

With interceptors or DKs you can shut not only to contest but to capture. That is huge imho, and scoring paladins... We all know them...

 

The other two are also awsome. Scouting interceptors are almost guaranteed to get some nice tear shots to the tanks if they shiny on t1, and if position allows, a DK could get a t1 charge.

 

And the rerolls to wound translates in str5 assault bolsters auto wounding on some foes...

 

Myself, not only I would NEVER choose a capt over a GM, but I also never leave home without one. I find its flexibility priceless. And h is pretty good in combat too!

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I sure wish the NDK was an FMC. Still I agree with GL... I think they are worth their points.

 

G ;)