Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Because of the way their rules are worded on the datasheet, you can include just Cerastus Knights, but cannot include more of any one Knight than the others. So in Oathsworn for example, you could include one Castigator, one Lancer, and one Atrapos. You could not, however, include two Lancers and one Cerastus.

 

You could also include Imperial Knights so long as their numbers were equal to/greater than the Cerastus Knights. Same for the Questoris Knight Magaera - no more of it than other Knights, so in an Oathsworn you'd be limited to one.

Edited by Carlson793

Not in an oath-sworn Detachment as far as I'm aware. Actually one of the several reasons why I will never probably run the war convocation.

 

That's honestly not a massive detriment in my book, especially with all the free stuff you get otherwise . . . 

That's honestly not a massive detriment in my book, especially with all the free stuff you get otherwise . . . 

 

Its not but it prohibits me from running the army I have and want to. I have x12 Dragoons and you cant run them in the War Convication. Also I really want to run the Imperial Knight Porphyrion with my army so giving up free stuff to run the army I want to I think is worth it, especially since running x12 walkers I have learned is pretty competitive in itself.

Related to this topic, can someone explain it like Im 5 the ITC ruling on this? I have seen some postings that indicate a cerastus knight be taken as the only knight in an Othsworn Detachment in the ITC. The third bullet down is one I am having trouble wrapping my head around. It seems to me that if they are saying you can have only Cerastus knight Acherons in your list with no other knight types, the ITC does not subscribe to the 1>0 part of the argument for having more of one knight type. Is this what you guys conclude from this whole ruling? I bring this up because even though the ITC rules are essentially house rules, they are used in a lot of houses so seem relevant.
 

  • Cerastus Knights: 

 

  • You may not include more of any one type of Imperial Armour Cerastus Knight (e.g. Archeron, Castigator, etc.) in your entire army, including those taken as a Lord of War choice, than you have other type of Imperial Knight in your entire army. That means, for example:

 

  • An army could include a Knight Detachment comprised of 3 Cerastus Knight-Acherons, as well as 1 Cerastus Knight-Acheron included as a Lord of War.

     

  • An army could include a Knight Detachment comprised of 2 Knight Paladins and 1 Cerastus Knight-Acheron, as well as another Cerastus Knight-Acheron as a Lord of War.

     

  • An army could include just a Knight Detachment comprised of 1 Cerastus Knight-Acheron, 1 Cerastus Knight-Castigator and 1 Cerastus Knight-Lancer.

Edited by Dawnstrider

 

Related to this topic, can someone explain it like Im 5 the ITC ruling on this? I have seen some postings that indicate a cerastus knight be taken as the only knight in an Othsworn Detachment in the ITC. The third bullet down is one I am having trouble wrapping my head around. It seems to me that if they are saying you can have only Cerastus knight Acherons in your list with no other knight types, the ITC does not subscribe to the 1>0 part of the argument for having more of one knight type. Is this what you guys conclude from this whole ruling? I bring this up because even though the ITC rules are essentially house rules, they are used in a lot of houses so seem relevant.

 

  • Cerastus Knights: 

 

  • You may not include more of any one type of Imperial Armour Cerastus Knight (e.g. Archeron, Castigator, etc.) in your entire army, including those taken as a Lord of War choice, than you have other type of Imperial Knight in your entire army. That means, for example:

 

  • An army could include a Knight Detachment comprised of 3 Cerastus Knight-Acherons, as well as 1 Cerastus Knight-Acheron included as a Lord of War.

     

  • An army could include a Knight Detachment comprised of 2 Knight Paladins and 1 Cerastus Knight-Acheron, as well as another Cerastus Knight-Acheron as a Lord of War.

     

  • An army could include just a Knight Detachment comprised of 1 Cerastus Knight-Acheron, 1 Cerastus Knight-Castigator and 1 Cerastus Knight-Lancer.

 

Basically, the ITC version says if you have more than one type of Knight in your list, any one FW Knight type is limited to the number of any other type of Knight with the fewest numbers. If, however, you only take one type of FW Knight in your list, you can have as many of that type as you like (subject to other list building limitations). 

 

So, for the examples you listed:

  • Since there are only Cerastus Knight-Acherons in the army, and these do not exceed the number of other Knights that are in the list, it's legal
  • Since there are 2 Knight Paladins, you can have no more than 2 Cerastus Knight-Acherons in your army (one in the Detachment, another as a LoW choice).
  • Since there are one of each of three Cerastus Knight chassis, and there are as many of each type as there are of the others types, it's legal 

Now for some illegal examples:

  • Two Cerastus Knight-Catigators and one Cerastus Knight-Acheron - you have more Castigators than Acherons, so it's ITC illegal
  • One Knight Paladin, one Knight Errant, and two Cerastus Knight-Acherons - you have more Acherons than either of the other types, so it's ITC illegal
  • Oathsworn Detachment of three Questoris Knight-Megaera Cerastus Knight-Lancers, with a Knight Paladin as a Lord of War - even though they are (part of) separate detachments, you have more Megaeras Lancers than Paladins in your army, so (say it with me, kids) it's ITC illegal

Make sense?

 

(EDIT: Oops... Lost my head and forgot the rule listed only concerned Cerastus chassis. Guess you have to follow normal datasheet rules for the Magaera.)

Edited by Carlson793

Thank you Carlson, I must have too thick of a skull. :) One more think, If I read it correct, this means the ITC allows an Oathsworn of just one cerastus , even if it is the only knight in the list? The fact all of the examples they gave included a list stacked with many knights is what is throwing me off I think. Thank for the help, oh wise one!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.