Gerantius, is he still playable with the new codex?

[wildcat]

I could be wrong, but as my understanding is that Gerantius is still a playable Character. Also I can use him as part of a formation from the new codex.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[pretre]

As far as I know, the old detachments/datasheets still work if they were not listed in the actual C:IK.

[wildcat]

Thank you, that is what I was thinking as well.

[VonVilkee]

Just keep in mind that he is not an actual pattern, he is a knight but not an errant.

[AbusePuppy]

Yeah, you can't take him in any of the detachments that specify that they use specific types of Knights. I believe he does qualify for formations that are simply particular numbers of Knights (with no limit on the pattern), however. So no taking him in an Adamantine Lance, but he's kosher (if still not very good) in a Baronial Court.

[pretre]

I wonder how many points you could pour onto him to make him. Can he be the baron and get an even better save?

[pretre]

Heh. If you put him at the head of the exalted, he gets a 2++ and BS/WS 7.

[pretre]

His rule says he can't take a warlord trait or rank though. Hmm. 

[VonVilkee]

I'd say baron or prince would be ranks he is supposed to be as is, yay free blades!

[Steel Angel]

Wait who are you talking about?   ,,,,,,, Oh yer Gerantius I forgot about him.

[winterman]

Gerantius is not listed as a Lord of War on his dataslate.  All the new formations have Lord of War slots.  Kind of an issue RaW.

[pretre]

The formations say 5 Knights, etc.

[winterman]

Damn sorry meant to say detachments.  The formations I guess do say Imperial Knights of any type.

[Guest]

Wait...so we are now allowed outdated WD content so long as GW hasn't specifically denied it?

 

Pretty sure I can dig up some old space marine rules that are legal by that line of thinking.

[pretre]

Wait...so we are now allowed outdated WD content so long as GW hasn't specifically denied it?

 

Pretty sure I can dig up some old space marine rules that are legal by that line of thinking.

It isn't outdated.

[Steel Angel]

Either way can still take him in anyarmy other the IK he always counted as a LoW for them

[Guest]

It isn't outdated.

So if I have a unit or character from a WD entry which pre-dates the current GW codex to which the WD references, I'm allowed to use it so long as GW hasn't specifically said I can't?

 

Sounds fine, now I need to go though the stack of old WD to see if any other characters and units are now legal again.

[pretre]

So if I have a unit or character from a WD entry which pre-dates the current GW codex to which the WD references, I'm allowed to use it so long as GW hasn't specifically said I can't?

 

Sounds fine, now I need to go though the stack of old WD to see if any other characters and units are now legal again.

Quite possibly, yes.

[AbusePuppy]

So if I have a unit or character from a WD entry which pre-dates the current GW codex to which the WD references, I'm allowed to use it so long as GW hasn't specifically said I can't?

 

That would be a call for the TO to make, so you'd have to ask them. Trying ti "surprise" someone by pulling up, say, the Frateris Militia or some other weird little WD unit in your army isn't going to work if the TO just says you can't use it.

[VonVilkee]

Gerantius is a data slate current army selection says to select data slates. The rule book even states these can come from army books/codexes, white dwarf, or black library.

 

So if you can find some old unique data slates go for it...

[Guest]

Gerantius is a data slate current army selection says to select data slates. The rule book even states these can come from army books/codexes, white dwarf, or black library.

 

So if you can find some old unique data slates go for it...

So, by that logic, are the outdated codex supplements still legal?

 

I'm not trying to troll, I just am trying to get a clear understanding of this logic as it seems foreign. In the past, players were very clear that a new codex would disallow all books, WD rules, and supplements that it was based around. The new would replace the old. Having the old remain in the presence of the new, sets a new precedence.

[pretre]

It is a case by case thing. Iyanden clearly was invalidated. Gerantius and adamantine lance were not.

 

This is much the same thing that happens with FW rules whenever a new book comes out.

[Guest]

This is much the same thing that happens with FW rules whenever a new book comes out.

Was thinking about this. Distinction is that the FW rules were/are often considered opponent's permission to use.

 

I very much agree that the FW rules are almost always out of date, even a few months after printing a new book.

 

 

It is a case by case thing. Iyanden clearly was invalidated. Gerantius and adamantine lance were not.

 

Case by case, huh? Fair enough. Was hoping for a clearer distinction, but that will have to do for now.

[VonVilkee]

I think it is because the Knight rules didn't actually change anything. Stats and names remained the same. gave them options but it really is just a bolt on, the whole book is more options for the previously extremely limited options.