Atropos in legion lists.

[1000 Sons]

We are having a discussion about whether it can be in a Legion list. I wanted on in my list and found the special rules that limit his use to only tagmahta and knights. Recently it was shown that he is in the table of contents of questoris, but I can't find a change on the actual page. Was something changed to include him for legions?

[Slips]

We are having a discussion about whether it can be in a Legion list. I wanted on in my list and found the special rules that limit his use to only tagmahta and knights. Recently it was shown that he is in the table of contents of questoris, but I can't find a change on the actual page. Was something changed to include him for legions?

You can only include him in a Legion List through the use of a Questoris Knights Detachment since the Atrapos is specifically stated to only be accessible to Mechanicum and QK under regular circumstances.

[Thanos33]

So the argument that's been referred to is whether or not the War Machine rule supersedes the text box of the Atrapos. 

The reasoning of this is the following:

The Warmachine rule allows the use of Knights whom appear in the Questoris Knight Crusade Army List (Crusade Imperialis). The Atrapos is in the Questoris Knight Army List as an entry.

Now the text box in the Atrapos rules states that it can be used in Mechanicum Taghmata Army Lists as a LoW and Questoris Knight Crusade Army Lists as a 0-1 choice if you have 2000 points of Questoris Knights. 

The question then becomes does the Atrapos text box rules still apply even after the War Machine rules allow it's use.

 

[Slips]

To me, it would since its a special condition/rule unique to the model itself.

[Jimm]

To me, it would since its a special condition/rule unique to the model itself.

I went down the same path after seeing the new rules saying any knight but I'd have to agree with slipstream, I think you'd have a hard time convincing people Pre game of this one.

[Caillum]

If you a scroll down the Rules forum a little, you'd find this topic:

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/324624-cerastus-knight-atrapos-in-war-machine-detachment/?do=findComment&comment=4465895

 

As you can see, it's been discussed already. Newest rules for War Machine Detachments does now allow for Questoris Knights (without Household Ranks) using the rules found in the Crusade Imperialis army list. If you look at the Atrapos entry there, it specifically mentions it's exclusivity in Mechanicum and Questoris Knights lists. Ergo, no Legion Atrapos.

 

I like this though, as it makes it more special! :)

[Charlo]

Which it is supposed to be :D

 

A techno-marvel avaliable only to the most influential Magos/ Houses - as it's bio states

[SkimaskMohawk]

Yea, it's a touch more complicated.

 

It's very true that the Atropos has a blurb saying it can be taken as a LoW for Taghmata or as a 1/2000pt  choice for Questoris. Here's why:

 

• It was released after the taghmata book, it makes sense they'd include the Atropos as LoW for them as they got access to every other Knight pattern.
• It's role changes depending on what list you take it in.

 

The reason why RaW breaks down is because:

• The blurb lacks any restrictive language such as only. This means that the Atropos isn't cemented in place for future role swaps, which brings us to...
• The Age of Darkness army list came out after the Crusade Imperialis did, with very clear intentions to give Marines access to all current Knights, with the simple qualifier of being in the Questoris Knight List of the Crusade Imperialis book. This ties in really well to the next bit on RaI.

A trending thought is that the Atropos is special because it's a Mechanicum Knight, and as such shouldn't be available to the Legions and is more exclusive. Here's the problem.

• It's available to the Questoris Knight list with the simple caveat of 1/2k. There's nothing else, certainly nothing forcing a Mechanicum skew to the list in taking either Magaeras or Styrixii; the 1/2k is what represents it's relative rarity compared to the other knight classes.
• Speaking of, the Magaera and Stryrix, both clearly as Mechanicum in terms of rules and armaments as the Atropos, are available to be taken in a Legion list.

If there was a restrictive clause on the blurb to make it anything more than clarifying its dual role then I'd agree RaW vs the more recent AoD blurb. If the other Mechanicum Knights had been restricted from the Legions I'd be more inclined to believe it RaI.

 

That being said, even with a more "legislative intention" approach of looking at the surrounding rules framework to try and figure out the framer's intentions on use, nothing is 100%.

 

The best course is usually to come to a census with your play groups using all the information possible.

[Charlo]

For me, it goes like this in very simple terms:

 

1. Rules say you can take a Knight as a LoW choice
2. I say "cool I'll take an Atropos" and go to the Atropos entry
3. Little box now says that I cannot
4. Sad but accepting face.

[SkimaskMohawk]

It doesn't say you cannot though. It explains it's split role across two armies; the newer AoD rules aren't affected.

[Charlo]

Except they are, when you go to choose the Atropos for your army, it's entry clearly states it can only be used as a LoW choice in a Tagmahta or as part of Questoris @ 1 per 2K.

 

Yes the other rules are newer, but they don't overwrite the separate rules for the Atropos IMO.

[Terminus]

You can't ignore specific rules because general rules are more lax. 

[Charlo]

TO BE FAIR - I can see the trail of thought that "Oh this book is newer, so it takes precedence!" which in the case of specific rules (i.e. points costs etc) it should.

 

But these are just similar, connected rules separate from each other.

[SkimaskMohawk]

It's really the lack of restrictive language like only, plus the very important context of the split role that allows the newer rules to take precedence. 

[Charlo]

It doesn't need restrictive language.

 

The new rule doesn't overwrite the rule Atropos' personal rules.

It doesn't need restrictive language.

 

The new rule doesn't overwrite the rule Atropos' personal rules.

[Ishagu]

Thing is, the book granting Knights as a LoW to Legions came out after, so I believe it's intended.

 

Exact wordings and GW rules aren't the best of friends. We have to review this as a mixture between "Rules as Written" and clearly "Rules as Intended."

[SkimaskMohawk]

It does need restrictive language because as it currently stands, the rule is there to allow its restricitions to be changed depending on mechanicum or questoris lists. That's literally the whole point of the rule since it was written at a time where Legions had no access to Knight LoWs and Mechanicum had access to every type.

 

However, i can see that we're just going to keep disagreeing, and this conversation is just going to get even more circular than it already is. Hopefully the OP got enough information out of the thread so his group can make a decision.

[1000 Sons]

Ya, the Atropos will not be joining the Death Guard on the field, in the new Imperialis Crusade book he still has the Mechanicum, and Knight only caveat.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

On the plus side, Cerastus Lancer is still 100% legit, and it can kill an Atrapos before it can swing due to Swift Strike. 

[Terminus]

I tend to err with rulings on the side that if something specifically doesn't allow me to do something, I cannot do that thing.  If we leave open the door for interpretations where you can do anything the rules don't specifically disallow, all hell breaks loose.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Good for you m8. :)