Warhammer armies: Bretonnia - The Round Table of Bretonnia
Home arrow Tactics arrow Tactica arrow In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights
24. July 2014, 02:51 GMT

 

 
 

The Round Table
Home Home
Forums Forums
Gallery Gallery
Knights Knights
Chat Chat
Links Links
About / Help About / Help
Articles
News News
Events Events
Literature Literature
Tactics Tactics
Hobby Hobby
Background Background
User Login
Support us

Vote at the The Warvault: Warvault Webring
Vote for us at the Warvault.net Webring!

Support the maintenance and costs of running this site:

 
 
 
 
In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 26
PoorBest 
Written by Jean Marcel l Impétueux   
Thursday, 21 September 2006
For those knights of Bretonnia who have given up on Questing Knights, I have conducted a tactica to prove their worth over the Grail Knights and inspire those who have lost their questing wants and bring them back to prove their might and worthiness!

 In Defense of the 7th ed Questing Knights

 

Yes... it is a parody title of "In Defense of the 7 Sacraments"- King Henry VIII

Obvious point lead off? Questing Knights... still worth it in comparison to Grail Knights?

6 Grail Knights, Unit Strength 12, Strength above average like Questing Knights, High Weapon skill, 2 attacks each.

On the charge: 10 Attacks strength 6 most likely hitting on 3's, probably 4's against chaos :blink: and wounding on 2's... pretty simple right?

Use for Grail Knights? Pretty much everything...

against Flagellants, Slayers, Eternal Guard, All Undead, White Lions or Swordmasters of Hoeth, Jezzails, Plague Monks, all Artillery, Greatswords of the Empire, Witch Elves of Khaine, Black Guard, Giants, Hammerers, Saurus Warriors, Stegadons, Salamander Hunting Packs, Terradons, Chameleon Skinks, Skinks, Kroxigors, Jungle Swarms, All Nurgle Units, and the majority of the Hordes of Chaos and Beasts of Chaos army books...

Are all problematic against grail knights as they are able to resist their charge. The Questing knights usually prevail in this section above Grail Knights as their charge into battle doesn't stop their strength in combat after one single round, their weapon skill is still very good in comparison to the Grail Knights (1 less) and even though they don't have a 2+ armor save or 2 attacks each, their charge in lance formation can expand afterwards to maximize attacks and their great weapons keep their strength able to wound on 2's against normal enemies and 3's against higher toughness enemies!

They may not be immune to psychology but they have re-rollable psychology tests which is almost as good as immunity as their High Leadership usually gives them the benefit of the doubt. They have Intiative 4 which is one less then Grails but is still higher then the majority of most units in the warhammer world who have 3 or even less (Lady forbid :P) mind you Grail Knights are used for hunting elite units that may strike down the best units in the game which is what they are for.

Meanwhile it seems people interpret by fluff and such that questing knights are meant for defeating the most terrible foes in combat. Well in a quick mentioning: "That's not true, they were never truly meant for this purpose", questing Paladins and Questing Lords were meant for such a purpose of striking down the mighty monsters but the units are good for disposing of any unit that gets in their way and those stubborn hard-to-break enemies the Grail Knights can't handle in second rounds of combat.

For almost the same amount of points, 9 Questing Knights (charge with 8 Attacks strength 5) are almost equal to the Grail Knights, they aren't as big targets as those Grail Models that are a bank for the enemy to withdraw from, and not to mention with 9 knights we have 2 combat resolution from our ranks instead of just one from Grail Knights (0 if even one is cut down) and they become fully dependable on their strength and ability to kill...

In an overall view, Questing Knights are a dependable unit to the opposite of Grail Knights. Yes you can depend on grail knights to appear in small units, be immune to psychology and stay in combat if you need them to hold the enemy back, and usually break the average unit on the charge [b]but[/b] taking the fact that you depend on Grail Knights for their wounding and bringing down the enemy makes them less dependable for Combat Resolution then the Questing Knights.

1 for ranks, 1 for standard + wounds while the enemy has outnumber (usually), standard, and 1-3 ranks + wounds basically that gives you 2 and them 3-5 combat res. start.

Questing Knights have 2 for ranks, outnumber, 1 for standard + wounds while the enemy has standard and 1-3 ranks. that giving you a 3 and them a 2-4

Questing Knights are very much just as capable of killing things as Grail Knights (although just a little less so) and therefore give them the upperhand on combat resoltuion with 2 simple wounds cause as Grail Knights requires 4 to take the lead. Of course causing wounds back, grail knights aren't tough to strike down, neither are questing knights. But with a 3+ armor save it saves almost as much as the 2+ on grail knights and both have the same ward save therefore saving them pretty much the same amount with an exception of one or two.

Second rounds of combat with expanding formation, the Grail Knights no ,onger have their rank bonus and have a standard plus their 10 attacks at strength 4 probably hitting first... the enemy will probably still have a 1 or 2 rank bonus and, not to mention, outnumber and standard plus wounds back... the enemy now has a 3 up on the grail knights as they have to cause 4 wounds to take up the combat res. I'm not saying that's hard, but now they will be wounding on a probable 3 instead of a 2 or even a 4 and therefore their wounds will be subsequently less.

Questing Knights expanding formation now have a rank bonus still, outnumber still, standard, and wounds. The enemy has their 2 ranks and a standard. The Combat starts as a tie and is much better then having the enemy 3 up on you... simply causing more wounds then the enemy after taking their attacks will win the day! Of course if you want a one up on the enemy you can not expand formation and if no models were lost you may have a 2 combat res for ranks and actually be beating the enemy by a single point in combat res.

Horses are all equal attack wise and the Questing knights are also cost effective. Taking 9 of these boys would save you 90 points (a whole trebuchet) instead of if you had taken 9 Grail Knights.

Fluff wise: Yes there are the reasons why Grail Knights take the field. In defense for the Lady and to cut down the foe before them that dares harm the sacred land of Bretonnia... it's usually always the same deal... although on crusades it's a bit different for they desire to push back the horrid armies that hurt and pillage the innocent... it is their job to show the wrath of the Lady.

Questing Knights have more extendable fluff although it's not always easy to see. Not only is it a character full unit as the questing knights are pulled from the depths of their quests along with many others and see their Bretonnian comrades storming the field towards the enemy. The armies upon the other side of the field have brought terrible beasts and many followers of evil Gods that are not worthy of the Lady and it is THEIR job to prove themselves in her eye, that they too can smite the enemy like a Grail Knight can, they can bring down the horrible dark enemies that threaten their brethren!

On Crusades they are also very cool to see fluff-wise as they include their fellow knights and peasants that accompany them on their quest outside the realms of Bretonnia to destroy the evil that lurks in the Old World, to prove themselves to the Lady outside of the Realms of Bretonnia!

There is no reason to say "Questing Knights aren't good anymore". They are the greatest great-weapon wielders, aside from chosen khornate warriors, in the old world and cost way less (like all of our cavalry) then other cavalry in the old world! They fight with strength much greater then MANY men and elves, even dwarfs! They break the enemy just as easily as Knights of the Realm and Knights Errant on the charge and have addition bonuses that make them better for the job such as great weapons and psychology help for only 4 points more then Knights of the Realm.

Not to mention, you can only take one unit of Grail Knights while you can take more then one unit of Questing knights. In addition, they only counts as Special units instead of taking up those precious rare slots that you could use for those great trebuchets we hold or even Grail Knights to inspire the Questing Knights on what they too shall be like if they sup from the Holy Grail.

And so my points have gathered to show that for their great uses against stubborn and unbreakable units, can break the average unit on the charge, and produce great combat resolution which make them much more reliable then some of our troops.

In conclusion, Questing Knights are still worth their point costs and are still of great use that some people have overlooked. They are better for resolution and have great strength among their ranks that exceeds that of normal men! I hope this inspires those who have shunned the Questing Knights from their armies to bring them back in for they can still be used for their powerful charge, great fluff, and steady skill in combat!

 

Last Updated ( Saturday, 23 September 2006 )
 
Discuss (10 posts)
In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 23 2006 23:01
This thread discusses the Content article: In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights

Author's Note: Must be reformatted, you may read it, all points are valid, but the layout must be rewritten. I hope some of you at least ignore the crappy layout and stuff to find the valuable points I was trying to make...

Thank You.

Opinions will be taken as well... I know 2 people rated it kind of low <.< so you can tell me why at least and leave a comment here.

Post edited by: Jean Marcel l Impéteux, at: 2006/09/23 18:44
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 23 2006 23:51
Pardon me for asking such a newbie question, but as I'm still very new to Warhammer I don't have much familiarity with the rules and thus not as much insight to the way rules changes from 6th to 7th have affected the gameplay. What changed from the 6th edition to the 7th that leads so many for believe that questing knights are not as valuable as they once were?
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 23 2006 23:53
To put it very simply they went from Strength 6 to Strength 5 and that has led people off the Questing bandwagon

They changed the rules for mounted great weapon wielders from +2 strength when mounted to +1 strength when mounted with a great weapon
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 24 2006 00:02
I agree. One thing, doesn't it matter what initiative Questing Knights have except vs other great weapons.
So that's a plus for the Grail Knights and helps them survive better.

But I agree the point cost in comparison to the next best(Grail Knights) is big enough for the decrease of Strenght. And their fluff owns.

Go Questing Knights!

Post edited by: Artinam, at: 2006/09/23 19:03
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 24 2006 00:15
One point, intiative matters if using Hand Weapons lol yay for supporters the strength 5 in questing knights is not enough to bring them to the 'ashes' and stop being used as that same enemy-crushing unit, they can still do it

Yay for their reliability!
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 24 2006 01:06
I pretty much disagree what you said about grail knights having trouble with all those units but you were right about questing knights. The only thing that changed with the 7th edition is that they're not quite as good in taking down tough or very armored units as they were before... but their STR only went down 1 point. It isn't 'such' a big difference.
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 24 2006 04:24
Questing knights were a quite good option and an overall good choice in the 6th edition.

Now they have lost some of their versitility.


KE with errantry banner are now a much better choice if you face fear/terror causing enemies especially though ones. They still have their S6 on the charge and are a bit cheaper.
They also can take normal breaktest against outnumbering fearcausers in the turn they charge while QK still autobreak unless they roll snakeyes.

In comparison with KOTR:
KOTR has S5 on the charge and better armor save.
Against fear causers well reroll psych is niceto get of the charge, but KOTR is Core and QK is Special.

(In the 6th edition you could lap around if you won combat, this has been removed in this edition so the S5 in second and further combat turns are more limited.)
[this section was wrong see page 46"free manouvres"of the rulebook]
To make things worse for the QK they also strike last except when they charged.
lower armor save makes it more vulnerable.

Thay could have a better AS if they use Handweapons, well S4 just doesn't cut it even with the added bonus of striking in inititiative order in stead of last with a GW.

S4... even peasant can strike at that strenght.

So for me in comparison with KE and KOTR they don't add that much extra.

If I'm going to use them I think it would be not in lance formation.
5 wide, no banner, with musician.
More attacks in second round combats then in lance formation.


As far as comparing them with GK, well I don't use GK and of what I've read,
Jean Marcel l Impéteux has made quite a nice essay of that subject.

Post edited by: tomahawk, at: 2006/10/31 07:35
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 25 2006 00:31
I still think they have there uses.

I however disagree with one point.... there fluff in my opinion is very poor. The idea of a Questing Knight being in the right place to take part in a battle and then when he does so to be part of a unit of so called questing knights seems a little strange. Questing Knights work well for Warhammer Quest, stories RPG etc but in my opinion does not convert nicely in terms of a battle field army.

However I have a unit of them in my army. I refer to them as the Bodyguard of the Standard Bearer. The idea of them being armed with double handed weapons and guarding the BSB seems in my mind anyway to work. I have a unit five strong so when then BSB is with them they are a unit of six. I dont use the lance formation with them as I prefer to have the extra attack something that is guaranteed now with the rul ethat units must be 45 wide to benefit from ranks.

With there own standar and battle standard they have a plus 2 comabt resolution. I have given the bsb the morning star so that he adds an extra bit of strength to them when charging of if charged.

The unit in my opinion is a more reliable way of attacking high armour or t 4 trops than the lance armed Errants or KothR.
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 27 2006 04:23
I continue to use questing knights (love models+ fluff) but point for point- grail knights are better.

For a few extra points you get

-twice the attacks
-I5 (vs I0)
+1 WS (which makes a crucial difference as it means you will hit other 'elite' units on 3's most of the times)
+1 armour save
-immune to psychology and magical attacks (nice but not needed)
-automatically granted blessing of the lady (can be very useful)

I argue that Grail knights (since the update) are actually better after the charge than Questing knights.

Lets say this is vs a unit of dwarf iron breakers

The grail kngihts strike first with twice the number of attacks. (6 attacks)
they hit on 4's (3 hits) and wound on 4's= 2 wounds which could be saved on a 3+ armour save

the dwarf reply is 4 attacks (one less) which hit on 4's (2 hits) and wound on 3's (1.32 wounds) the armour save is 3+ = .87 chance of a wound (most likely no wound)

For the QK the Dwarfs hit first with 5 attacks hitting on 3's (3.3 hits) wounding on 3's
(2.2 wounds) of which 1.1 will be save. Ie: one dead questing knight.

In reply the QK get 3 attacks, hit on 4's (1.5hits) and wound ing on 3's getting one wound. which could be saved on a 4+

Add in to this the fact that the Gk would have done a huge amount more damage on the charge (+1WS, S, A) and the Gk are quite clearly the winners

QK are now very vulnerable- WS4 means they are hit easier, they hit last, and they have no chance to kill first+ they have a 3+ armour save.

It's a sad day.
Re:In Defense of the 7th ed. Questing Knights Sep 27 2006 06:56
Well unfortunately I don't think I will ever play a game with questing knights in the 7th edition the way the rules stand currently. There are far too many negatives to taking questing knights when comparing them to knights of the realm or even errants. Here's a quick comparison.

Questing knights

1) 28 points
2) Musican and standard combined 27 points
3) +1 S +1 I
4) -1 Save
5) Hits with S5 on charge
6) Questing vow (re-roll failed psych test)
7) Special choice

Knights of the Realm

1) 24 points (4 points cheaper)
2) Musican and standard combined 24 points (3 points cheaper)
3) -1 S and -1 I
4) +1 save
5) Hits with S5 on charge
6) knights vow
7) Core choice

To me there is not a whole lot of difference. The way I play my army is more of a horde style of play (I realize most bretonnian players don't play this way). So the two biggest factors for me are the points of a unit and what type of selection they are(ie core/special). When you look at knights of the realm you are getting a unit that serves the same function as a questing knight unit minues the re-rolled psych tests and the additional stats(+1S +1I). When you look at the big picture though are those two things equal to an extra 4 points and taking up a very important "special" slot. In my mind I would take KOTR any day and fill up my special slots with yoemen, peg knights and the grail relic. Just my two cents,

Joan of Arc
There are too many comments to list them all here. See the forum for the full discussion.

Discuss this item on the forums. (10 posts)
< Prev   Next >
 

Warhammer, Warmaster, Games Workshop (and more) are registered trademarks of Games Workshop Ltd. This site is not affiliated with Games Workshop Ltd. and no claim of ownership is made to any of these trademarks.
Design by Earl Cadfael and Guillaume le Courageux, responsible for the content (Admins) are: Etien de Rochefort, Guillaume le Courageux, Robert de Giselles (see "Staff").