40k Knight Questoris Defender + Codex: Imperial Knights

[Focslain]

3 minutes ago, StrangerOrders said:

Maybe a hot take but if people really wanted that they could use a Kill Team slot for them as they have for alot of factions.

 

A specialist Armsmen kit that doubles as a generalist Armsmen kit that you can take however many you want.

 

Because then its a net positive that gives IK participation in Kill Team, doesn't eat up a main release (which would annoy people who are there for the Mecha fantasy) and adds something fun to the game.

 

The Brittonnia Chaff is both cope and silly though imo. Knights are even more snooty than most factions and their fluff (and excellent books) show that. If they bother to have infantry, it would be well-equipped, trained and almost certainly hereditary.

 

The IK chaff should probably be Armsmen with good gear more akin to Storm Troopers with Veteran training. Frankly that art does feed into that, they might look creepy but they don't look poor or ill-equipped by any means. 

 

The mob of unwashed peasants doesn't hold much water at all. Unless GW throws a wildcard like they are prone to.

 

Then again, I mostly just want a scifi-twist on the 14th-15th century armoured formations with the same bright colours and banners I deck my knights in so I am very biased.

 

IK infantry should undoubtably be a Kill Team release though.

Might as well use the Questor Forgepact detachment, but with armsmen counting as the skatarii. Figured that is why it was there in the first place. 

[TheMawr]

28 minutes ago, sitnam said:

 

I've seen this opinion a lot, and I really don't get it. The whole niche of Knights is that they are an entire army of Mech. If you want to run some infantry, there have always been the option of allying in knights to other armies as counts-as retainers. You could ally in various Imperial infantry through things like agents. And now with the Xmas detachments both flavors of Knights can deploy some infantry alongside them with built in rules to synergize the two sides

 

I think people usually dont mean it as Knights becoming less a knight army, as people arent usually asking for battleline or combat type units* ( wich are the ones you get from allies.) but rather utility infantry that increase the feeling of an entire army of mech. ( something allies can never do, as their datasheets are not built to be utility for knights, although the christmass detachment for chaos especially did do some tricks there.)

 

a spacemarine army is still a spacemarine army when it has tanks or a drop pod, even though a tank itself isnt a spacemarine, neither is a drop pod.. yet their existence can make the spacemarine army be a spacemarine army even more, in a way... now these are vehicles so its a very weird comparison.. I could make comparisons to cultists in CSM armies but when I was typing that I realise I think you in general do not like that kind of thing if I remember correctly.

 

And thats the bottomline of it really, its two different kind of people with two different kind of taste in army building, neither being more wrong or more right.

 

Personally I have no stake in it though, I will never have a knight army  either way.

 

 

* While I was typing this StrangerOrders went and proved the exact opposite but usually I see the request being more for the stuff like in the art I showed and this old artwork ( even if this one, and probably the other one too likely represent non warfare situations ) :

Edited 14 hours ago by TheMawr

[Mogger351]

22 minutes ago, sitnam said:

 

I've seen this opinion a lot, and I really don't get it. The whole niche of Knights is that they are an entire army of Mech. If you want to run some infantry, there have always been the option of allying in knights to other armies as counts-as retainers. You could ally in various Imperial infantry through things like agents. And now with the Xmas detachments both flavors of Knights can deploy some infantry alongside them with built in rules to synergize the two sides

It's not necessarily the knights owners/players with these opinions. It's a common gripe playing into knights that small arms and the rest are pointless, so the knights players feel compelled to include some "other" for their opponents.

 

Then there is the fluff as well, these mechs don't run and repair themselves, there's a lot of artwork and fluff for supporting infantry for both chaos and loyalist.

 

The grotmas detachments were great, except needing an additional codex sucks and shows a lack of commitment for rules continuity. I also don't think "don't use your army rules, detachments or relics and simply be an ally in another army" is a satisfying solution to playing knights with some infantry.

[Lord Clinto]

I'm really surprised this isn't on the larger chassis.

[Marshal Reinhard]

12 minutes ago, Lord Clinto said:

I'm really surprised this isn't on the larger chassis.

It would a made a bit more sense, yeah. The original Questoris already has some 6-7 different armaments already, while the Dominus has 2 setups (and some top weapon variation). A third setup would've felt more balanced.

[ZeroWolf]

44 minutes ago, TheMawr said:

 

I think people usually dont mean it as Knights becoming less a knight army, as people arent usually asking for battleline or combat type units* ( wich are the ones you get from allies.) but rather utility infantry that increase the feeling of an entire army of mech. ( something allies can never do, as their datasheets are not built to be utility for knights, although the christmass detachment for chaos especially did do some tricks there.)

 

a spacemarine army is still a spacemarine army when it has tanks or a drop pod, even though a tank itself isnt a spacemarine, neither is a drop pod.. yet their existence can make the spacemarine army be a spacemarine army even more, in a way... now these are vehicles so its a very weird comparison.. I could make comparisons to cultists in CSM armies but when I was typing that I realise I think you in general do not like that kind of thing if I remember correctly.

 

And thats the bottomline of it really, its two different kind of people with two different kind of taste in army building, neither being more wrong or more right.

 

Personally I have no stake in it though, I will never have a knight army  either way.

 

 

* While I was typing this StrangerOrders went and proved the exact opposite but usually I see the request being more for the stuff like in the art I showed and this old artwork ( even if this one, and probably the other one too likely represent non warfare situations ) :

Okay, i want a model of...whatever this thing in red is now. I'd be 100% ready to believe that this was something chaotic if it wasn't for the fact that the Knight behind it wasn't spiky

[Madao]

2 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Seems like a very low effort model for GW.

 

 

Tell it to GK NDK upgrade sprue. This one is at least looking great

[Bouargh]

The colour scheme is quite good. Designwise I have ambivalent feelings: beamer and icons OK; plasma is too « modern » looking for me vs. Admech and big chassis versions; but Shield is the les convincing IMHO. It looks like a mushroom; a half enclosed/caparacionned one or partly built in a carapace extension could have been better. 
 

yet overall aspect is rather OK 

[Casual Heresy]

I like the weapons but with it being on a Questoris chassis I won't be rushing out to buy it. I've got three Questoris knights already and only room in my old monster case for one more big knight and I think I'd rather save that slot for a Dominus or Ceratus class. Think I'll maybe try snagging the bits on eBay. Knight weapons are about the only thing I have the patience to magnetise.

Edited 12 hours ago by Casual Heresy

[TheMawr]

27 minutes ago, ZeroWolf said:

Okay, i want a model of...whatever this thing in red is now. I'd be 100% ready to believe that this was something chaotic if it wasn't for the fact that the Knight behind it wasn't spiky

 

Im not sure if its fanart or official art, Its one of the older images in my 40k folders ( I downloaded it 2017 apparently, so around my "return to 40k".. I think that makes it actually predate chaos knights doesnt it ?)

[Garrac]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

The grotmas detachments were great, except needing an additional codex sucks and shows a lack of commitment for rules continuity. I also don't think "don't use your army rules, detachments or relics and simply be an ally in another army" is a satisfying solution to playing knights with some infantry.

I know this is a beaten horse by me at this point, but I would :cuss:in give GW half my monthly pay to just get a unique Chaos Cult codex fully operational ala Imperial Agents way that allows me to finally go insane, solving both the issues of unsatisfied Lost and Damned fans and CSM fans not wanting to feel forced to not play space marines. Even sent GW itself a mail about this!!!! Give Chaos some love, goddamnit.

[Marshal Mittens]

Interesting we just got a rumor image item that was clearly a shoulder missile launcher for a knight and that's not in the new model here. Maybe something else for Chaos coming too?

[Xirix]

As a fan of the Knight with the Avenger Bolt Cannon (I think that's what it was) and the Rapid-Fire Earthshaker Cannon/Volcano Cannon, I'm happy to see another double-ranged Knight.

[Focslain]

11 minutes ago, Marshal Mittens said:

Interesting we just got a rumor image item that was clearly a shoulder missile launcher for a knight and that's not in the new model here. Maybe something else for Chaos coming too?

The shield generator on this one's back is the rumour image from 4/22, which is still a quick turnaround time iirc. 

[Karhedron]

26 minutes ago, Marshal Mittens said:

Interesting we just got a rumor image item that was clearly a shoulder missile launcher for a knight and that's not in the new model here. Maybe something else for Chaos coming too?

 

The design did look a bit spiky so I guess so.

[Wispy]

Knights need a substantial add as a faction, new arm options aren't cutting it. Add infantry! Also a transport! 

[Karhedron]

Seriously, just using Imperial Agents you can add 9 different types of Infantry and 4 Transports to a Knights army. Just pick the flavour of infantry that you think best represents your Retainers/Men-At-Arms and off you go. Tempestus Scions look quite good as their heavy carapace armour can be painted to match your Knight livery. Then just run them as Voidsmen or something.

[CL_Mission]

I feel like the Arbite's armour gives them an appropriate look for Knight Household foot infantry if you painted them up in the right livery, giving them the shield option would give them even more of a knightly feel too. Bespoke Knight Household foot men would be a neat addition and work for getting Knights into Kill team somehow but there are some great kits for making your own.

[Tastyfish]

3 hours ago, TheMawr said:

 

Im not sure if its fanart or official art, Its one of the older images in my 40k folders ( I downloaded it 2017 apparently, so around my "return to 40k".. I think that makes it actually predate chaos knights doesnt it ?)

 

She's a Sacristan I believe, think the knightly version of a tech marine. Not a fully ordained tech priest but one who has been inducted into some of the mysteries of Mars whilst also being trained in their own secret and ancient traditions.

 

The art is from the second Imperial Knight book I think.

[Timberley]

2 hours ago, Karhedron said:

Seriously, just using Imperial Agents you can add 9 different types of Infantry and 4 Transports to a Knights army. Just pick the flavour of infantry that you think best represents your Retainers/Men-At-Arms and off you go. Tempestus Scions look quite good as their heavy carapace armour can be painted to match your Knight livery. Then just run them as Voidsmen or something.

Yeah, I think that's the easiest way to get some Men-at-Arms onto the tabletop.

 

I've used the Solar Auxilia infantry to represent mine (because SA look cool), with appropriate household markings in the same layout as you'd get on a knight. They're supplemented by the Peltasts and some converted Serberys to round things out. 

 

The new Knight looks good, and I'm unsurprised that GW decided to split the kit, so to speak. I'm glad they didn't go all the way and have half of the load outs in one box and the other half in the other! 

[Wormwoods]

6 hours ago, TheMawr said:

I think people usually dont mean it as Knights becoming less a knight army

I'm asking for that, because the point of a tabletop wargame is to be moving infantry around the table, but I'll admit to being a weird purist about this.

[HeadlessCross]

5 hours ago, Wormwoods said:

I'm asking for that, because the point of a tabletop wargame is to be moving infantry around the table, but I'll admit to being a weird purist about this.

MAN wait until you hear about Land Raiders and how long they've been around. 

[ThaneOfTas]

23 minutes ago, HeadlessCross said:

MAN wait until you hear about Land Raiders and how long they've been around. 

Have Land Raider variants ever been the only models in a Space marines army? Because if not then that's very clearly a completely different situation with absolutely no bearing on Frater Wormwoods personal objection to infantry-less armies in an infantry based wargame.

Edited 1 hour ago by ThaneOfTas

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Friendly neighbourhood moderator Dr. R. here - 

 

I think also we've wandered far enough topic on this - this thread is about the new knight, not people's thoughts on the grotmas detachment or other knight/infantry combinations.

Edited 46 minutes ago by Dr_Ruminahui

[sairence]

I don't hate it. I probably would have prefered a new Armiger with a proper anti horde layout, as that's an actual gap in the army.

 

Curious how they'll stat it so it doesn't step on the toes of either the Crusader or the Castellan.