A Question about Cerastus Knights

[Father Mehman]

So I'm thinking about going down the rabbit hole and ordering a Cerastus Knight as the leader of my Knight House (which hasn't been created yet ). I've got the three PDFs for each variant - barring the purely AdMech one - and have decided that either the Knight Castigator or Knight Lancer would be great in this role. But, like many people, I have questions to ask of you who have gone down this road before.

 

Build Difficulty - How hard are Cerastus Knights to build? Will I need to pin the arms and whatnot or are the sockets (?) a pretty good fit? I figure the feed on the Knight Castigator's Bolter Arm of Doom will need to be heated and moulded to fit but is that the worst I can expect?

 

Attack Profile - The PDFs say the Cerastus Knights as a whole get one extra attack versus the regular Questoris Knights. Have I missed something or is this accurate?

 

Formations - I figure that I can place a Cerastus Knight into any of the Formations without hassle (as long as they don't exceed the number of other Knights in the Formation or whatever). I don't have the Codex to hand so this is just lazy confirmation.

 

Thank you for any help you can give me !

[Kilofix]

Build : Better to pin yes - and it helps if you have a vice to hold stuff together while the glue dries. The other tricky thing is attaching the Pistons on the legs. The GW plastic Knights have fixed poses so their Pistons are a single piece and already the correct length. Whereas for the multi pose Cerastus, the Piston is two pieces consisting of the Sleeve and the Rod that will have to be cut and fit appropriately. You'll also have to test pose everything before gluing - again a vice helps.

 

https://flic.kr/p/sD7E6d

 

https://flic.kr/p/sD7ErU

 

Attack Profile: They do have 1 more Attack and they also run 3D6 with Flank Speed.

 

Formations: If your current Formation allows you to take an LoW, then you CAN instead use a SINGLE Knight Cerastus (without even having another Knight) in that LoW slot. If your current Formation does not allow you to take an LoW, then you'll have to run the Codex Imperial Knights - Oathsworn or Household Detachment. In those Oathsworn or Household Detachments you DO have to have more regular Knights than Cerastus. Confused yet?

[Father Mehman]

I stay confused, Kilofix !

 

Thanks for the help! Now to decide which one I want. One is shooty, the other is not. Hmm...

[Kilofix]

Acheron is a monster vs MEQ. Lancer is good vs other Knights.

[Father Mehman]

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing game-wise. I think I'll go with the Acheron because everyone plays Space Marines, myself included. It would also be fun fluff-wise, I think, because of the portrayal of the Knight pilot would be different to what I'm used to. Consider it sold!

 

Wait, just re-reading what you've said and what's on the PDFs, I can't take only one Cerastus Knight if I'm fielding my Knights alone? I would have to take one Cerastus and two normal Questoris Knights? Am I reading that right?

[Kilofix]

Space Marine CAD with 1 Cerastus - ok as it can be taken as the CAD's LoW slot

 

Imperial Guard CAD with 1 Cerastus - ok as it can be taken as the CAD's LoW slot

 

Space Marine Gladius Strike Force with 1 Cerastus - NOT ok as the Gladius has no LoW slot and the Cerastus will have to be taken as part of a Knight Detachment

 

Oathsworn Knight Detachment with 1 Cerastus - NOt ok as in a Knight Detachment, there must be more regular Knights than Cerastus

[Father Mehman]

 

Well, that's alright. Thanks for setting me straight!

[Skinrider]

The leg positioning on the cerastus is a bit tricky, patience (and a vice help a lot). I disagree about the pistons, it's a piece of cake, you can snap fit the bottom part and line it up for the top part (there's a line on the outside showing where the bottom is inside. You've got a slack of about 4mm to make mistakes and if you make a mistake... just put it in one of the other 7 locations :D

 

I used a 2 part epoxy glue for all the load bearing pieces, things like the pistons don't need it, they are decorative and don't hold up the model.

 

You can check my painting log in my signature for some assembly pics

[Dawnstrider]

I am looking for some clarification.  The rules for the knight Atrapos, for example says "you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Atrapos in your army than you have Knights of other kinds." To me, this means that since they used the full, specific name of the knight that you just need to have two different knights, but they can both be cerastus knights as long as they are different patterns. If you had a Lancer and an Atrapos, you still would not have more "Cerastus Knight Atrapos than knights of other kinds."

 

I see this a lot where ppl drop the specific name of the knight pattern and just say as you did "have more regular knights than cerastus patterns" or similar verbiage. 

Edited August 19, 2016 by Dawnstrider

[Skinrider]

 

I am looking for some clarification.  The rules for the knight Atrapos, for example says "you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Atrapos in your army than you have Knights of other kinds." To me, this means that since they used the full, specific name of the knight that you just need to have two different knights, but they can both be cerastus knights as long as they are different patterns. If you had a Lancer and an Atrapos, you still would not have more "Cerastus Knight Atrapos than knights of other kinds."

 

I see this a lot where ppl drop the specific name of the knight pattern and just say as you did "have more regular knights than cerastus patterns" or similar verbiage. 

 

It's rather simple, the knight types are: Paladin, Warden, Errant, Gallant, Crusader, Lancer, Acheron, Castigator and Atropos (Styrix and Magaera in 30k too) . The "Cerastus" class is called a "pattern" not "type": 'Knight-Atrapos is a unique variant type of the Cerastus pattern'

 

You may not have more Atropos than any other knights. If you've got 2 paladins and 1 warden, you can have 1. If you have 2 paladin and 2 warden, you can have 2.

[Father Mehman]

That's all well and fine but the wording is: "However, owing to their rarity in the 41st Millennium, you may not have more Cerastus Knight [insert pattern / type / mark / edition / rendition / redux / whatever here] in your army than you have Knights of other kinds."

 

"Kinds" isn't referring to types - it is referring to "patterns", as you put it. Kilofix excellently answered this above.

 

If I have misunderstood you, Skinrider, please, do tell as I am perplexed by what you are saying.

[Skinrider]

That's all well and fine but the wording is: "However, owing to their rarity in the 41st Millennium, you may not have more Cerastus Knight [insert pattern / type / mark / edition / rendition / redux / whatever here] in your army than you have Knights of other kinds."

 

"Kinds" isn't referring to types - it is referring to "patterns", as you put it. Kilofix excellently answered this above.

 

If I have misunderstood you, Skinrider, please, do tell as I am perplexed by what you are saying.

Sorry I wasn't clear enough

 

Kilofix is wrong on this matter

 

From the datasheets:

 

1: you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Castigators in your army than you have Knights of other kinds

2: you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Atrapos in your army than you have Knights of other kinds

3: you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Lancers in your army than you have Knights of other kinds. 

4:  you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Acherons in your army than you have Knights of other kinds

 

These rules make sure to be clear that you can't take more of the [insert FULL name] than other knights. It does not say "you may not have more Cerastus knights than...", it gives the FULL name of each individual knight type. 

 

Therefore you could have a Household Detachment of:

1. Lancer, Acheron, Castigator and Atropos

2. Warden, Lancer, Castigator

3. Warden, warden, lancer, lancer

4. Lancer, lancer, acheron, acheron 

 

NOT:

1. Warden, lancer, lancer, acheron

[jeffersonian000]

Warden, Lancer, Lancer, Acheron is legal.

 

Warden, Lancer, Lancer is not.

 

SJ

Edited August 20, 2016 by jeffersonian000

[Father Mehman]

++EDIT++

 

I'm only taking one Cerastus anything - probably an Acheron. Hopefully someone else can use this for information.

Edited August 20, 2016 by Mehman

[DeStinyFiSh]

++EDIT++

 

I'm only taking one Cerastus anything - probably an Acheron. Hopefully someone else can use this for information.

 

But then you can only field him as a LOW choice if your detachment allows it. For an Oathsworn detachment you would need 1 other Knight, so that there are not more Cerastus Knight (Acherons) in your army than other knights.

[Father Mehman]

 

++EDIT++

 

I'm only taking one Cerastus anything - probably an Acheron. Hopefully someone else can use this for information.

 

But then you can only field him as a LOW choice if your detachment allows it. For an Oathsworn detachment you would need 1 other Knight, so that there are not more Cerastus Knight (Acherons) in your army than other knights.

 

Oh, don't worry. He won't ever run alone !

[jeffersonian000]

ITC does allow you to take a single Cerastus on it's own in an Oathsworn. But of course that requires you to be using the ITC FAQ.

 

SJ

[Goonbandito]

To be honest, I'd be going a Cerastus-Knight Lancer.  Yes the Acheron chews through MEQ, but the Imperial Knight Warden/Paladin/Crusader already do a pretty good job of that.  The biggest issue Imperial Knights have are facing other Super Heavy Walkers/Gargantuan Creatures - against another Knight it basically comes down to luck of the dice, and against a Wraithknight you're basically boned.  With the Knight-Lancer though, it stands a pretty good chance of taking out a Wraithknight.  It gets I5 when it charges (strikes at the same time) an Invulnerable save in Close Combat and enemy SHW/GC get a -1 To Hit you back.  And the Shock Lance gives some nice shooting with the Concussive rule to potentially knock the enemy down to I1 before you charge.

[Skinrider]

Warden, Lancer, Lancer, Acheron is legal.

 

How do you reach that conclusion when the Lancer rules say:

 

"you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Lancers in your army than you have Knights of other kinds."

[Kilofix]

 

Warden, Lancer, Lancer, Acheron is legal.

 

How do you reach that conclusion when the Lancer rules say:

 

"you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Lancers in your army than you have Knights of other kinds."

His premise is 2 Lancers = 1 Warden + 1 Archeron

[Skinrider]

 

 

Warden, Lancer, Lancer, Acheron is legal.

How do you reach that conclusion when the Lancer rules say:

 

"you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Lancers in your army than you have Knights of other kinds."

His premise is 2 Lancers = 1 Warden + 1 Archeron

 

hmmm that's one way to read it, interesting

[jeffersonian000]

 

 

 

 

Warden, Lancer, Lancer, Acheron is legal.

How do you reach that conclusion when the Lancer rules say:

 

"you may not have more Cerastus Knight-Lancers in your army than you have Knights of other kinds."

His premise is 2 Lancers = 1 Warden + 1 Archeron

hmmm that's one way to read it, interesting

Because for each Lancer there is a non-Lancer, which satisfies the restrition.

 

SJ