How to make GK work with Beta DS rule

[techsoldaten]

And if 1000/1200 pts out of 2000 is AM+I, are you really playing Grey Knights?

 

Considering Grey Knights were part of a mixed army in every edition up to 6th, I would say yes.

 

It's nice that Grey Knights have their own Codex, but an 8th edition Codex is really just a collection of datasheets, Stratagems, relics thematically linked with a keyword. It doesn't mean much more than that except for the pretty pictures inside.

 

You have the option of running an army consisting entirely of Grey Knights units, just as you could in the old Daemonhunters Codex. But you can build a more versatile force using datasheets from other Codexes.

 

A more interesting question may be, if all the units in the army have the Grey Knights keyword, is it really a Grey Knights army? They have traditionally operated in the company of allies, what is so special about this edition that they should forsake their erstwhile fellows?

 

Think about it another way: let's pretend there was a Codex Ordo Malleus. It contains all the Grey Knights datasheets along with a selection of AM and Inquisitor datasheets. Would it make sense to take a 'pure' Grey Knights army then, given all these other options bundled together?

 

It gets harder to justify limiting one's army to unit entries from a single book once you take the book out of the equation. Games Workshop needs to sell books to make money, buying the Codex means you paid for a collection of datasheets with some other rules attached. But that's all you paid for.

 

The rules of 40k are not built around Codexes, they are built around detachments, datasheets and keywords. Other than personal preference, Codex is a meaningless concept as far as the game is concerned.

[STTAB]

Shame GK don't have the ordo malleus keyword, could then have some cheap hq and bodies.

 

So. Thread conclusion (?)

 

For mono;

Interceptors

Interceptors with razorback/rhino

Interceptors with Storm ravens

 

Or;

GK with allies who can take a punch and clear space for a turn 2 deep strike.

 

GK detachment as the minority of an army.

[Corvus Fortis]

Considering Grey Knights were part of a mixed army in every edition up to 6th, I would say yes.

 

 

Considering, these editions were from 3 to 5 which is already half of all editions GK ever had, I would say no. The past is the past. 

 

Using this logic we may say that black templars is not really black templars if they use allies because back than they had their own codex. What was back then doesn't matter now at all. Even chaos demons or CSM players who have single codecies tend to build mono-mark lists. But if you play GK without allies you do not play true GK because they used to be merged with other factions? Seriously?

 

 

Allies is not something that someone has to take to play effective. Allies required for one very thing: when a player has more than one army and want to field them together for fun or for interesting combinations they found. They are not something mandatory, they are addition. "Just play soup" was told here many times. Ultramarines, Raven Guard, Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus - almost every other imperial army (besides, maybe Deathwatch, but they are pretty new) can make a decent monobuild. Orks, Tau, Necrons cannot take allies at all.  But Grey Knights are the only exception that designed the way they cannot do anything without allies? When I was choosing army, there was no disclamers on the first page of codex like" Attention! This force is not intended to be fielded without allies! Consider buying "Codex: Space Marines" too!" I liked miniatures and rules from THIS codex and no other. 

 

[techsoldaten]

 

Using this logic we may say that black templars is not really black templars if they use allies because back than they had their own codex. What was back then doesn't matter now at all. Even chaos demons or CSM players who have single codecies tend to build mono-mark lists. But if you play GK without allies you do not play true GK because they used to be merged with other factions? Seriously?

 

That would be overstating the point. Offered my thoughts about Codexes in previous editions as an exercise to show it's fluffy.

 

Rules wise, a Codex is as relevant to 40k as scatter dice, blast templates and true line of sight.

 

Why does choosing units exclusively out of a single Codex matter? Isn't that like insisting on using a template for a flamer? Maybe it makes you feel good, but it has nothing to do with 8th edition.

 

Imperial players have the widest variety of units to select for their detachments from all the Codexes out there. Not sure why Grey Knights players in particular see this as a bad thing. Feels like we're caught up in the past.

 

 

Allies is not something that someone has to take to play effective. Allies required for one very thing: when a player has more than one army and want to field them together for fun or for interesting combinations they found. They are not something mandatory, they are addition. "Just play soup" was told here many times. Ultramarines, Raven Guard, Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus - almost every other imperial army (besides, maybe Deathwatch, but they are pretty new) can make a decent monobuild. Orks, Tau, Necrons cannot take allies at all.  But Grey Knights are the only exception that designed the way they cannot do anything without allies? When I was choosing army, there was no disclamers on the first page of codex like" Attention! This force is not intended to be fielded without allies! Consider buying "Codex: Space Marines" too!" I liked miniatures and rules from THIS codex and no other.

 

Yeah, but this is not Ultramarines, Raven Guard, AM, etc. This is Grey Knights.

 

Maybe those other armies don't need allies. So what? Every army has benefits and drawbacks, ours happen to be more serious than theirs.

 

Grey Knights are overcosted and hard to play. Everyone knows that. What does a warning accomplish when everyone knows that? What does continuing to complain about it accomplish when everyone knows how much the rules suck?

[Sweetcurse]

Maybe we eventually get good rules? Squeaky wheel gets the oil.

[Corvus Fortis]

Why does choosing units exclusively out of a single Codex matter?

 

 

For exactly two reasons:

 

1) We have to pay money for every book. So why one must pay at least twice as much as other players to use an army effectively?

2) Simply not liking stuff from other codecies.

 

If army has its own codex, it implies it is a force in itself and requires nothing outside its own book to be fielded. 

 

Every army has benefits and drawbacks, ours happen to be more serious than theirs.

 

 

Having to field 50% of another army just to perform okey is not a draw back, it is a poor design. And a poor desing has to be removed from a game. 

[Icosiel]

 

 

If army has its own codex, it implies it is a force in itself and requires nothing outside its own book to be fielded. 

 

 

I don't know, man. Imperial Knights are getting their own Codex, and they are definitely not meant to be fielded by themselves.

[Corvus Fortis]

Imperial Knights were top force on their own in 7th and after codex with new armigers they are likely become decent again. Imperial Agents will be the only exception, but they are obviously stuff that doesn't have place in other codecies. 

[Leif Bearclaw]

 

Considering Grey Knights were part of a mixed army in every edition up to 6th, I would say yes.

 

5th actually. The Ward dex, and the first 'Codex Grey Knights' iirc, was at the centre of the 5th ed codex creep. And if they wanted to take the GKs back to the Daemonhunter days, they should release a new Daemonhunter book, with the Inquisitors, Strom Troopers etc. in the Dex, instead of another GK dex, but gimped so you're 'meant' to buy another faction's book to make your army playable.

 

Sisters are due next year. They were once part of a 'mixed army' with the Witch Hunter book. Do you honestly expect they'll get a release where they have to ally in half their points to be viable, and the players will blithely accept this because the Sister were once part of Witch Hunters? I don't think so. It seems everyone is expecting a fully fleshed out and playable force. Why should the GKs be happy with less?

 

 

Imperial players have the widest variety of units to select for their detachments from all the Codexes out there. Not sure why Grey Knights players in particular see this as a bad thing. Feels like we're caught up in the past.

They don't? It's not hard to find mono build fans for any Imperial army. We aren't 'Imperial' players. We're 'Space Wolf', 'Grey Knight' or 'Imperial Guard' players. That's what drew us into this hobby, and as kept us here for however long (in my case over 20 years, at varying intensity).

 

 

Rules wise, a Codex is as relevant to 40k as scatter dice, blast templates and true line of sight.

This is just, wrong. If a Codex is as relevant to 40k as scatter dice etc. Why are GW still selling and releasing Codexes?

 

If that's what GW are going for, they really should bring their PR department to heel. Because when I read stuff like this, it certainly looks like they're still pushing the idea of Codex based, one faction armies as viable options.

 

 

As we said, elite armies will find this change particularly welcome – if you play an army like Space Marines or Adeptus Custodes

 

 

f you have a Grey Knights or Thousand Sons force

 

 

while the Command Point cost may seem steep, you’ll be able to pack loads into your Drukhari list with ease.

 

 

Drukhari armies are FAST – and Cult of the Red Grief armies are REALLY fast.

 

 

Remember, Drukhari armies can have more than one Warlord, so by combining Detachments and utilising a Kabal of the Black Heart Archon, you’ll be able to keep even more Command Points available.

 

 

In Codex: Drukhari, your Kabal Detachments will form the backbone of your army

 

It's all 'GK army this' and 'Space Marine force that' not 'Imperial soup force where at least half the army's IG and then a smattering of you favourite colour PA to taste'.

 

Frankly, while I can certainly understand the appeal of allies, their implementation seems to have been pretty poisonous for game balance, especially for Imperial factions (which I have some limited sympathy for, an Imperial soup has so many options balancing with it in mind is nightmarish, but then again, it's a mess of their own making). Nobody has any problem with xenos books being viable as mono builds, but to suggest that an Imperial faction, with a Codex that costs the same as any given Xeno book, should be as viable as Nids or Necrons gets major pushback. I just don't get it .

[Bartali]

 

 

If that's what GW are going for, they really should bring their PR department to heel. Because when I read stuff like this, it certainly looks like they're still pushing the idea of Codex based, one faction armies as viable options.

 

Wouldn't it be refreshing if GW were up front and honest ?

 

"Codex: Grey Knights is designed as a get-you-by codex allowing you to field your Grey Knights miniatures until we re-do the miniature line and codex with Primaris style minis and units. In the interim period we strongly recommend Grey Knight players use an allied force such as Adeptus Militarum to bolster their forces"

[Beams]

So, my list, which I'm hoping to take to some local games on is

GMDk with Psilencers, Psycannons, Sword +1 damage relic

Volidus with sanctuary, gate, purge soul

 

Four strike saayds all with falchions

Three Max sized Interceptors with falchions

Two hammer Apocetharies

A paladi banner bearer with the fury of Deimos and vortex of doom

 

 

It's 55 models, and it should, dice willing, shred any screens of guard first turn.

 

Obvs, depending on what I'm facing decides how I deploy, but I see it going two ways: they have screens of guard and Basilisks, so I shunt my Interceptors and GoI my dreadknight, shoot away their screens, and attempt to charge what's left, the rest of my army rushing up the board.

 

Or if they don't have out of LoS, I place my Interceptors our of Loss, and hide for a turn, shunting them turn two with all my deepstrikes coming in, and attempt a full on beta strike.

 

Wish me luck.

[Panzer]

Don't forget to Combat Squad your Interceptors when you can't place them out of line of sight properly. And good luck. ;)

[Danarc]

So, my list, which I'm hoping to take to some local games on is

GMDk with Psilencers, Psycannons, Sword +1 damage relic

Volidus with sanctuary, gate, purge soul

 

Four strike saayds all with falchions

Three Max sized Interceptors with falchions

Two hammer Apocetharies

A paladi banner bearer with the fury of Deimos and vortex of doom

 

 

It's 55 models, and it should, dice willing, shred any screens of guard first turn.

 

Obvs, depending on what I'm facing decides how I deploy, but I see it going two ways: they have screens of guard and Basilisks, so I shunt my Interceptors and GoI my dreadknight, shoot away their screens, and attempt to charge what's left, the rest of my army rushing up the board.

 

Or if they don't have out of LoS, I place my Interceptors our of Loss, and hide for a turn, shunting them turn two with all my deepstrikes coming in, and attempt a full on beta strike.

 

Wish me luck.

GMDK can't take relic but liber. Moreover in my opinion for the standard bearer the banner is a better relic. 

I have one two questions. Will you put your apos, ancient and Voldus in DS? And what do you think to do if your opponent fields Tanks? You are absolutely without antitank. 

[Helycon]

 

So, my list, which I'm hoping to take to some local games on is

GMDk with Psilencers, Psycannons, Sword +1 damage relic

Volidus with sanctuary, gate, purge soul

 

Four strike saayds all with falchions

Three Max sized Interceptors with falchions

Two hammer Apocetharies

A paladi banner bearer with the fury of Deimos and vortex of doom

 

 

It's 55 models, and it should, dice willing, shred any screens of guard first turn.

 

Obvs, depending on what I'm facing decides how I deploy, but I see it going two ways: they have screens of guard and Basilisks, so I shunt my Interceptors and GoI my dreadknight, shoot away their screens, and attempt to charge what's left, the rest of my army rushing up the board.

 

Or if they don't have out of LoS, I place my Interceptors our of Loss, and hide for a turn, shunting them turn two with all my deepstrikes coming in, and attempt a full on beta strike.

 

Wish me luck.

GMDK can't take relic but liber. Moreover in my opinion for the standard bearer the banner is a better relic. 

I have one two questions. Will you put your apos, ancient and Voldus in DS? And what do you think to do if your opponent fields Tanks? You are absolutely without antitank. 

 

 

I think he meant that his GMNDK is taking the +1 damage Warlord Trait, Nemesis Lord.

[Beams]

 

 

 

 

So

 

Wish me luck.

GMDK can't take relic but liber. Moreover in my opinion for the standard bearer the banner is a better relic.

I have one two questions. Will you put your apos, ancient and Voldus in DS? And what do you think to do if your opponent fields Tanks? You are absolutely without antitank.

I think he meant that his GMNDK is taking the +1 damage Warlord Trait, Nemesis Lord.

Yeah, +1 damage. I know it's not first to the fray, but I find it helps my dreadknight cut through Dreadnoughts and tanks like butter.

 

I really don't have enough antitank, but I'm not sure where I can add more.

 

My plan for antitank is almost entirely melee, using my two Apocetharies and Voldus to smahs through them, as well as the dreadknight. Purge soul also helps, since Leman Russes are only LD 7, which if you roll we'll/are willing to command reroll, can be nasty, but is more of a hope for it, but don't plan for it thing.

 

As long as my opponents doesn't go all tanks, I think I'm fine, and if they do, I can hope to tie them up in melee combat? If I can prevent as many as possible from shooting, the better. Of course, against Eldar that won't happen, but I don't really have much of a plan for them except "roll well". Anyone else, I think I'm fine.

 

The banner does look inticing, but 3/6 heavy Bolter shots at 30/15 seems easier to get each turn. Not sure it's the better choice over the banner but we'll see. I also have a model I converted up a long time ago that has a banner and a giant machine gun, so I'm mostly doing that for the model.

 

As for deepstrikers Apoc's/Voldis it really depends on what my opponents bring, as they are easily hidden if I'm trying to avoid LoS, but would be nice to have by my front lines.

[Panzer]

If your opponent goes mass tank behind some cheap screens better not try to go for the tanks at all with your list. Stick to the objectives and get rid of the opponents objective capturing stuff.

[Capt. Mytre]

 

 

 

So

 

Wish me luck.

GMDK can't take relic but liber. Moreover in my opinion for the standard bearer the banner is a better relic.

I have one two questions. Will you put your apos, ancient and Voldus in DS? And what do you think to do if your opponent fields Tanks? You are absolutely without antitank.

I think he meant that his GMNDK is taking the +1 damage Warlord Trait, Nemesis Lord.

Yeah, +1 damage. I know it's not first to the fray, but I find it helps my dreadknight cut through Dreadnoughts and tanks like butter.

 

I really don't have enough antitank, but I'm not sure where I can add more.

 

My plan for antitank is almost entirely melee, using my two Apocetharies and Voldus to smahs through them, as well as the dreadknight. Purge soul also helps, since Leman Russes are only LD 7, which if you roll we'll/are willing to command reroll, can be nasty, but is more of a hope for it, but don't plan for it thing.

 

As long as my opponents doesn't go all tanks, I think I'm fine, and if they do, I can hope to tie them up in melee combat? If I can prevent as many as possible from shooting, the better. Of course, against Eldar that won't happen, but I don't really have much of a plan for them except "roll well". Anyone else, I think I'm fine.

 

The banner does look inticing, but 3/6 heavy Bolter shots at 30/15 seems easier to get each turn. Not sure it's the better choice over the banner but we'll see. I also have a model I converted up a long time ago that has a banner and a giant machine gun, so I'm mostly doing that for the model.

 

As for deepstrikers Apoc's/Voldis it really depends on what my opponents bring, as they are easily hidden if I'm trying to avoid LoS, but would be nice to have by my front lines.

 

 

+1 damage is useless if you don't make it into combat in the first place, that's why you take first to the fray. ~27% to 46% or w/e it is. It's also an aura, so even if you don't make it with one, you can still tie up the vehicle in combat with another unit. Just take the Nemesis Daemon Greathammer if you want to kill tanks, min damage 3, -4 AP so they get no armour save.

[techsoldaten]

 

Considering Grey Knights were part of a mixed army in every edition up to 6th, I would say yes.

 

 

Considering, these editions were from 3 to 5 which is already half of all editions GK ever had, I would say no. The past is the past. 

 

Using this logic we may say that black templars is not really black templars if they use allies because back than they had their own codex. What was back then doesn't matter now at all. Even chaos demons or CSM players who have single codecies tend to build mono-mark lists. But if you play GK without allies you do not play true GK because they used to be merged with other factions? Seriously?

 

While I appreciate your enthusiasm for mono-faction armies, let's be fair.

 

Rules-wise, a Codex isn't what it used to be. Battle-forged is an invention of 6th edition, keywords are an invention of 8th. The rules now allow units from multiple Codexes to be fielded, and players are now limited in what they can take by points and very broad factional terms.

 

I don't remember seeing a rule that dictates what faction a mixed-build army belongs to. Perhaps you wish to cite one. But my understanding is that any army can be named anything within reason and, for all game purposes, it doesn't matter. Mechanics that actually affect the game, like Chapter Tactics, apply at the detachment level. So I could take a mixed Grey Knights / Dark Angels force, call it XYZ Marines, and it would mean just as much as if I called them Grey Knights.

 

The point being: players can call their armies what they want, regardless of what factions make up what detachments. The name of the faction doesn't affect the game.

 

Help me understand what I'm missing. Other than decisions about what models to buy / paint scheme, why does it matter what you call your army?

 

Allies is not something that someone has to take to play effective. Allies required for one very thing: when a player has more than one army and want to field them together for fun or for interesting combinations they found. They are not something mandatory, they are addition. "Just play soup" was told here many times. Ultramarines, Raven Guard, Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus - almost every other imperial army (besides, maybe Deathwatch, but they are pretty new) can make a decent monobuild. Orks, Tau, Necrons cannot take allies at all.  But Grey Knights are the only exception that designed the way they cannot do anything without allies? When I was choosing army, there was no disclamers on the first page of codex like" Attention! This force is not intended to be fielded without allies! Consider buying "Codex: Space Marines" too!" I liked miniatures and rules from THIS codex and no other. 

 

 

The only point I was making is that Grey Knights traditionally have had lots of allies around them. Not sure how that gets translated into "just take soup."

 

I don't personally care if all my units come from a single Codex or not, but appreciate you for taking the time to share your perspective.

 

My Grey Knights army includes a Vortimer Pattern Land Raider and a Doomglaive Dreadnought from Forgeworld - which is definitely not from the Codex. I have a Storm Raven and am really struggling with how to paint it. Should I use Grey Knights colors (the primary army), or Dark Angels colors (the allies I keep bringing in), or Deathwatch colors (which I am planning to build when the Codex comes out and use as allies.) That does give me some anxiety, so I can relate on that level.

 

It's funny this came up in a conversation about the beta deep strike rule. The way I've been dealing with it is allies in drop pods and using my strike squads as interceptors. Given the way plasma and heavy bolters work, I'm finding allies to be really important in dealing with screens and taking out some hard targets. Just count me on the side of allies are a good thing and don't take away from the fluffiness.

[Aothaine]

I kind of like what TTT stated they would do. 30 Inceptors Stavex1, double swords x9 they jump first turn and then you gate in a GMNDK up with First to the Fray. Going to be running that with two Fire Raptors I think. Tons of anti-chaff/horde with 30 storm bolters and the four quad heavy bolters from the Fire Raptors. Should make short work of most armies. Then you run the GMNDK with two of the psilencer cannon weapons for 24 more bolter profile shots and you can drop the stratagem to make it S5/-1/1 if necessary.

[Helycon]

I kind of like what TTT stated they would do. 30 Inceptors Stavex1, double swords x9 they jump first turn and then you gate in a GMNDK up with First to the Fray. Going to be running that with two Fire Raptors I think. Tons of anti-chaff/horde with 30 storm bolters and the four quad heavy bolters from the Fire Raptors. Should make short work of most armies. Then you run the GMNDK with two of the psilencer cannon weapons for 24 more bolter profile shots and you can drop the stratagem to make it S5/-1/1 if necessary.

Quick note that the Fire Raptors can't be fielded by GK, so they would need to be in a separate detachment of two auxiliaries, or add another flier and have an airwing detachment of a chapter of your choosing.

[Aothaine]

 

Quick note that the Fire Raptors can't be fielded by GK, so they would need to be in a separate detachment of two auxiliaries, or add another flier and have an airwing detachment of a chapter of your choosing.

 

 

Wait really? I looked all over the imperial index. I must have missed it. Where does it say that?

[Helycon]

 

 

Quick note that the Fire Raptors can't be fielded by GK, so they would need to be in a separate detachment of two auxiliaries, or add another flier and have an airwing detachment of a chapter of your choosing.

 

Wait really? I looked all over the imperial index. I must have missed it. Where does it say that?

The fact that it's not under the section 'Grey Knights' I'm afraid.

 

It also tells you in the FAQ

[Aothaine]

 

The fact that it's not under the section 'Grey Knights' I'm afraid.

 

It also tells you in the FAQ

 

 

Thank you! ^_^ Seems I'll have to look into some other way to spend my last 700 points if I build Grey Knights. :p That or find a way to squeeze in a third flyer with an elite army. :(

[Shagah]

I kind of like what TTT stated they would do. 30 Inceptors Stavex1, double swords x9 they jump first turn and then you gate in a GMNDK up with First to the Fray. Going to be running that with two Fire Raptors I think. Tons of anti-chaff/horde with 30 storm bolters and the four quad heavy bolters from the Fire Raptors. Should make short work of most armies. Then you run the GMNDK with two of the psilencer cannon weapons for 24 more bolter profile shots and you can drop the stratagem to make it S5/-1/1 if necessary.

 

Sadly I don't think you can take two of the same weapon on a GMNDK, it states "This model may take up to two different weapons from the following:".

Would be cool though

[Danarc]

 

 

I kind of like what TTT stated they would do. 30 Inceptors Stavex1, double swords x9 they jump first turn and then you gate in a GMNDK up with First to the Fray. Going to be running that with two Fire Raptors I think. Tons of anti-chaff/horde with 30 storm bolters and the four quad heavy bolters from the Fire Raptors. Should make short work of most armies. Then you run the GMNDK with two of the psilencer cannon weapons for 24 more bolter profile shots and you can drop the stratagem to make it S5/-1/1 if necessary.

Sadly I don't think you can take two of the same weapon on a GMNDK, it states "This model may take up to two different weapons from the following:".

Would be cool though

Exactly. GMDK can have two different weapons.