The BT Codex is now the oldest codex with the Eldar one being revamped. And as far as I know barely anybody plays BT anymore. So I thought I'd gauge what people think GW will do with them; do a new book and risk it, discontinue the line altogether, or integrate them into the next SM codex release?
With the new supplemental Codex for Eldar, I would guess if it is successful the same will be done for BT and perhaps the other SM chapters like Sallys.
GW won't put it back into the SM Dex. They could make too much money from people jumping on the band-wagon. Hell, at this rate, we'll probably get a walker/MC that'll be 18" tall. Because they can. Regardless of whether or not it should (Which I do not for a moment believe it should) be incorporated into the SM book, it's too much of a money-making scheme for them.
I think they will release a new BT codex. There are a lot of diehard Black Templar fans out there. Helsreach is one of the more popular novels, and they have a great model and character in Grimaldus.
Also, they would kind of ruin the story behind the Black Templars if they just rolled them back in to the main codex. Sgts leading squads of 10? librarians?
The Crusader wrote: GW won't put it back into the SM Dex. They could make too much money from people jumping on the band-wagon. Hell, at this rate, we'll probably get a walker/MC that'll be 18" tall. Because they can.
The Crusader wrote: GW won't put it back into the SM Dex. They could make too much money from people jumping on the band-wagon. Hell, at this rate, we'll probably get a walker/MC that'll be 18" tall. Because they can.
I don't see them canceling the Black Templars, but I'm at the point where I would be fine with them being rolled into the C:SM. At least they'll get updated more frequently.
I voted for all three options. Why? Because we simply don't know. Lots of people still play Black Templars, they have far more potential than BA or DA for a unique codex, because they are not a Codex chapter. BT are more unique, and DA and BA were pretty much just generic marines in red and green before they were done up.
BT are maybe far beyond the horizon right now.
GW could deal with most of the xenos , after this almost all-imperial run they did before. I'd expect Orks, nids, maybe even SM and others from 5th ed updated. Orks and nids make for a easy "add big kits" release.
The need their patience...err...focus their zeal into an overwhelming return.
And we are not part of a codex hell bent on this codex , we are going to keep the truth in our hearts and prevail in his name!
For the Emperor! For Dorn!
"No one" plays Black Templars anymore because it is a difficult book, not because the book is outdated and underpowered. There are lots of options and no real apparent "deathstars" or obvious spam builds. How many other codexes allow POTMS on Predators and Vindicators? or allow Space Marine squads to number in thebteens with Land Raiders? Black Templars have a lot going on and for them. They are not getting mainstreamed.
We all heard the same things for Dark Angels (outdated codex, gonna get rolled into Space Marines, blah blah).
I would like to see a BIG book when the new Codex, Space Marines book is released. I'm talking as big as the rules book! Have the first part the history of the Marines, then a large section dedicated to the Ultra Marines and vanilla marines in general. After that a chapter, 10-15 pages each, of fluff and special rules for say the ten most notable Marine Chapters that are well known but would never have or need their own stand-alone book. Black Templars, White Scars, Imperial Fists, Salamanders, Exorcists, Death Company and so on.
Probably won't happen, but would be neet if it did.
Solis Luna Astrum wrote: I would like to see a BIG book when the new Codex, Space Marines book is released. I'm talking as big as the rules book! Have the first part the history of the Marines, then a large section dedicated to the Ultra Marines and vanilla marines in general. After that a chapter, 10-15 pages each, of fluff and special rules for say the ten most notable Marine Chapters that are well known but would never have or need their own stand-alone book. Black Templars, White Scars, Imperial Fists, Salamanders, Exorcists, Death Company and so on.
Probably won't happen, but would be neet if it did.
Llthough nice, and probably a lot of people would like this. But take a look at the only book similar to what you are suggesting. Horus Heresy book 1, £70 most places. Any one who has ultramarines is not going to want to spend more than twice on a codex because they have to have the other chapters listed.
I can however see there being a £30 Space marine codex that deals with the Ultramarines and vanilla marines, and then a few £20 supplements like they did with DFTS, and Realm of fire.
I cant see them being an IOS only purchase, As this limits their customer base. Although i bet they would love to be able to stop spending money on printing books and distribution and only upload a Ibook, and yet still charge the same
SoloFalcon1138 wrote: "No one" plays Black Templars anymore because it is a difficult book, not because the book is outdated and underpowered. There are lots of options and no real apparent "deathstars" or obvious spam builds. How many other codexes allow POTMS on Predators and Vindicators? or allow Space Marine squads to number in thebteens with Land Raiders? Black Templars have a lot going on and for them. They are not getting mainstreamed.
We all heard the same things for Dark Angels (outdated codex, gonna get rolled into Space Marines, blah blah).
You mean the stuff alotta 4th edition dex's had before the "Alessio" updates, it's outdated practices not because its difficult.
AustonT wrote: BACK TO SUPPLIMENTAL CODEXES YE WHERE THEE BELONGS!
I also want Blood Angels to go back to supplimentals.
I think niether will occur, but seriously feth the BT codex.
Where is this coming from? Were you touched by a member of the clergy as a child?
Its doubtful they will get rolled in, but with this most recent release of Eldar and Iyanden, if it contains army material, Templars could very well follow suit.
The old black Templar codex is so small and light on units that it might as well be a supplemental anyway.
I say anything is better than nothing. Right now we have an ancient codex with half the options of more modern codices. Seriously look at the troops section, it"s about six pages long.
SoloFalcon1138 wrote: "No one" plays Black Templars anymore because it is a difficult book, not because the book is outdated and underpowered. There are lots of options and no real apparent "deathstars" or obvious spam builds. How many other codexes allow POTMS on Predators and Vindicators? or allow Space Marine squads to number in thebteens with Land Raiders? Black Templars have a lot going on and for them. They are not getting mainstreamed.
We all heard the same things for Dark Angels (outdated codex, gonna get rolled into Space Marines, blah blah).
You mean the stuff alotta 4th edition dex's had before the "Alessio" updates, it's outdated practices not because its difficult.
I guess... The outdated rules issues have been dealt with in the FAQs. Outside of that, Black Templars are just hard because of the smorgasbord of options everything may take. "Need to shave a couple points off? throw those frag grenades away!" Otherwise, its a pretty solid codex. Tank Hunters on Dreadnoughts? ok. Blessed Hulls to frustrate lances? ok. huge Marine/scout tarpits? sure, why not.
"no one" plays Templars because its not a new, shiny, "flavor of the month" book.
I really want to start Black Templars as my second army, So I really hope they roll out a new BT codex. So I voted because I think they will and also because I am hoping they will.
However, I think they could still be competitive, and if I had the time and the money I would have started them alongside my Orks.
I have played with them on vassal quite a bit however, and was having some luck only loosing to chaos daemons and their flying DP spam.
I'm hoping they just roll it into the SM codex. That's what they should have done with DA's and BA's at the very least, and SW's as well. You can fit everything about the Templars, rules-wise, in 2-3 pages as an addendum to a C:SM list (same with the other Loyalist chapters too really...), they don't need their own book. If they must be their own separate army, well, that's what Forgeworld really should be for.
Vaktathi wrote: I'm hoping they just roll it into the SM codex. That's what they should have done with DA's and BA's at the very least, and SW's as well. You can fit everything about the Templars, rules-wise, in 2-3 pages as an addendum to a C:SM list (same with the other Loyalist chapters too really...), they don't need their own book. If they must be their own separate army, well, that's what Forgeworld really should be for.
Yeah there is some sense to this...however, being that DA and BA and SW have their own books, I think BT should be represented as well. If for 7th edition they decide to roll them all together in to one book and discuss the various rules there, that would make sense.
Until that point, I think Black Templars deserve their book. They are so much more different than standard marines.
I think there are people that have voted to see black templars get rolled in to the SM codex because they think all the SM chapters should be listed in one codex. I can also see Black Templars getting updated as one more codex in your way to your armies update.
Vaktathi wrote: I'm hoping they just roll it into the SM codex. That's what they should have done with DA's and BA's at the very least, and SW's as well. You can fit everything about the Templars, rules-wise, in 2-3 pages as an addendum to a C:SM list (same with the other Loyalist chapters too really...), they don't need their own book. If they must be their own separate army, well, that's what Forgeworld really should be for.
Yeah there is some sense to this...however, being that DA and BA and SW have their own books, I think BT should be represented as well. If for 7th edition they decide to roll them all together in to one book and discuss the various rules there, that would make sense.
Until that point, I think Black Templars deserve their book. They are so much more different than standard marines.
I think there are people that have voted to see black templars get rolled in to the SM codex because they think all the SM chapters should be listed in one codex. I can also see Black Templars getting updated as one more codex in your way to your armies update.
I just don't feel they shouldv'e gained one to begin with, they aren't even a founding chapter!
Way back when 2nd ed was new and I found out Samus was a girl for the first time we got a promise of a new squat codex.
Dude. That is an old grudge to carry. Chances are that 99.98989% of all miniature and board game companies from that year haven't survived till today. You get the lucky shot being in the hobby for the one company that did. Be happy for what you have!
Vaktathi wrote: I'm hoping they just roll it into the SM codex. That's what they should have done with DA's and BA's at the very least, and SW's as well. You can fit everything about the Templars, rules-wise, in 2-3 pages as an addendum to a C:SM list (same with the other Loyalist chapters too really...), they don't need their own book. If they must be their own separate army, well, that's what Forgeworld really should be for.
Yeah there is some sense to this...however, being that DA and BA and SW have their own books, I think BT should be represented as well. If for 7th edition they decide to roll them all together in to one book and discuss the various rules there, that would make sense.
Until that point, I think Black Templars deserve their book. They are so much more different than standard marines.
I think there are people that have voted to see black templars get rolled in to the SM codex because they think all the SM chapters should be listed in one codex. I can also see Black Templars getting updated as one more codex in your way to your armies update.
I just don't feel they shouldv'e gained one to begin with, they aren't even a founding chapter!
Thats what makes them so unique! They are the epitome of the changes that were taking place after the Horus Heresy. They said "we don't need the codex astartes, we know what's right!" They dont use tac squads, they dont use sergeants. You could probably take a couple pages and summarize all of their rules in to the SM codex, or you could build on this unique chapter and make something great. They are probably one of the most unique chapters out there, second maybe to only the space wolves.
My argument is that if there are going to be any other codexes out there for space marine chapters other than the vanilla marines then Black Templar deserve a spot.
Way back when 2nd ed was new and I found out Samus was a girl for the first time we got a promise of a new squat codex.
Dude. That is an old grudge to carry. Chances are that 99.98989% of all miniature and board game companies from that year haven't survived till today. You get the lucky shot being in the hobby for the one company that did. Be happy for what you have!
I was in elementary school back then. The squats mean rather little to me other than the blurb on them I saw when I bought that old nid codex. Back when Zoanthropes still had legs and we rolled on the "see how hard you cry" table.
Black Templars are probably one of the most fun codices out there right now for the sheer amount of builds you can do with so few units.
I hate to see threads like this because all this ends up as "This doesn't deserve a codex" or "Roll everyone into everyone and make a book of Ultramarines". And its probably the same nay sayers that said DA were so bland they'd definitely get rolled into the next marine codex. Let's see what happens.
I just don't see the point in making LESS Space Marine Codexes. If there are 100 Space Marine Players out there that I'll play against in the coming year, I sure as hell hope they'd spread themselves between as many different Codexes as possible. Given how prevalent Space Marines are, 40K needs MORE Space Marine Codexes, if anything, to liven up the game. Merging them would only kill the diversity and make the game more bland.
Besides, it doesn't matter how many "Codexes" they release. GW is a miniature company. Dark Eldar alone saw some 30 new releases in miniatures. That is more than ALL 6th Edition Codexes so far (not counting Eldar) taken together. Would it be different if they had released 5 different Dark Eldar Codexes with that binge of miniatures instead of just 1? Probably not. It's a miniatures game, not a "Codexes"-game.
I agree, GW should expand the SM range seen as it's so popular. I personally hope BT stay independent, they're so different and unique (as mentioned) and Helsreach/Grimaldus is awesome. That's why I set this poll up, to gauge what everyone else thought, and at last check integration seems to be the (albeit slight) majority :(
There are multiple reasons for this. GW has shown that it has had issues updating and attending to each faction in turn, and each extra marine thingy makes that take even longer.
The differences between each marine book often are less than what you'd get within many other books, to be frank, they're not in any way truly unique factions and they largely amount to FoC or wargear swaprs.
The ones GW could truly go wild with and make all sorts of really cool and interesting stuff, the Chaos marines, GW has seen fit to hamfist into one book and treat 9 entire traitor Legions and innumerable post heresy renegades as one book no more worthy of differentiation than single loyalist marine chapters.
On top of all that, it puts an overfocus on marines, making 40k more and more bland with everything being "T4 3+Sv" everywhere and the genetically engineered super soldier becomes the baseline average instead of the exceptional.
AustonT wrote: BACK TO SUPPLIMENTAL CODEXES YE WHERE THEE BELONGS!
I also want Blood Angels to go back to supplimentals.
I think niether will occur, but seriously feth the BT codex.
Where is this coming from? Were you touched by a member of the clergy as a child?
Its doubtful they will get rolled in, but with this most recent release of Eldar and Iyanden, if it contains army material, Templars could very well follow suit.
No I've just been playing for more than a day. BT never needed thier own codex, and I liked playing my BA out of the supplimental. DA's arguably have been done a great disservice by thier last coded and either need to be reimagined or roll into a supplimental too.
Supplimental allow the core codex to be updated frequently and background players to get cool new models every few years without the OMFG MAT WARD WROTE ANOTHER SM LOVE ORGY! Codex jumping.
Supplimental codexes ruled the ring before GW became an evil empire.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh right by disservice in the DA book I meant the last one. I haven't played 6e at all.
The Black Templars are completely non-codex compliant and contain very little of the structures that make up typical Astartes forces, having told Guilliman to take his book and go feth himself with it. If any chapter deserves their own codex, it's them.
Kain wrote: The Black Templars are completely non-codex compliant and contain very little of the structures that make up typical Astartes forces, having told Guilliman to take his book and go feth himself with it. If any chapter deserves their own codex, it's them.
Except...how does that translate to the battlefield and a tabletop force? It really doesn't. Plus, we've got plenty examples of chapters that are no more adherent in C:SM, such as the Iron Hands who effectively are made up of multiple mini chapters and Dreadnought leaders and the like, and they still use the normal codex.
Kain wrote: The Black Templars are completely non-codex compliant and contain very little of the structures that make up typical Astartes forces, having told Guilliman to take his book and go feth himself with it. If any chapter deserves their own codex, it's them.
Except...how does that translate to the battlefield and a tabletop force? It really doesn't. Plus, we've got plenty examples of chapters that are no more adherent in C:SM, such as the Iron Hands who effectively are made up of multiple mini chapters and Dreadnought leaders and the like, and they still use the normal codex.
The templars make much greater usage of land raiders than Comdex chapters, merge their scouts into a very rough tac squad equivalent, virtually everyone is armed for close combat, marines are deployed in hordes of angry space Germans rather than squads, they outright ignore enemy suppression fire unlike less insane chapters, scouts have to carry around devastator weapons because the battle brothers can't be fethed with jobs that preclude them from getting into stabby chop range, and no psykers none of the time.
Kain wrote: The Black Templars are completely non-codex compliant and contain very little of the structures that make up typical Astartes forces, having told Guilliman to take his book and go feth himself with it. If any chapter deserves their own codex, it's them.
Except...how does that translate to the battlefield and a tabletop force? It really doesn't. Plus, we've got plenty examples of chapters that are no more adherent in C:SM, such as the Iron Hands who effectively are made up of multiple mini chapters and Dreadnought leaders and the like, and they still use the normal codex.
The templars make much greater usage of land raiders than Comdex chapters, merge their scouts into a very rough tac squad equivalent, virtually everyone is armed for close combat, marines are deployed in hordes of angry space Germans rather than squads, they outright ignore enemy suppression fire unlike less insane chapters, scouts have to carry around devastator weapons because the battle brothers can't be fethed with jobs that preclude them from getting into stabby chop range, and no psykers none of the time.
None of which really *requires* its own codex and is all roughly approximatable (aside from merging of scout and tac squads) as is in the current C:SM, and could all be fit in as a a sub-section in 2 pages, 3 tops including characters. It still shares 80%+ of the same stats, weapons, wargear, vehicles, rules, units, etc with Codex: Space Marines.
If they *really* need their own sublist, that's what Forgeworld is and really should be for. No SM chapter is so unique that it needs its own unique codex on the same level as Eldar, Orks, Necrons, Imperial Guard, etc barring the Grey Knights.
Kain wrote: The Black Templars are completely non-codex compliant and contain very little of the structures that make up typical Astartes forces, having told Guilliman to take his book and go feth himself with it. If any chapter deserves their own codex, it's them.
Except...how does that translate to the battlefield and a tabletop force? It really doesn't. Plus, we've got plenty examples of chapters that are no more adherent in C:SM, such as the Iron Hands who effectively are made up of multiple mini chapters and Dreadnought leaders and the like, and they still use the normal codex.
The templars make much greater usage of land raiders than Comdex chapters, merge their scouts into a very rough tac squad equivalent, virtually everyone is armed for close combat, marines are deployed in hordes of angry space Germans rather than squads, they outright ignore enemy suppression fire unlike less insane chapters, scouts have to carry around devastator weapons because the battle brothers can't be fethed with jobs that preclude them from getting into stabby chop range, and no psykers none of the time.
Sure you're not thinking of World Eaters?
No psykers none of the time = Psykers all of the time.
Personally, the more I look at it, I wish GW would just make the SM codex fairly big, with rules that allow you to make your own various chapters as well as giving examples of such rules in action (such as an Ultramarine, Black Templar, Blood Angel, and Dark Angel example page) and then use the rest of the book for fluff. The issue is balancing it, of course, but by making the marines much more modular like that, it allows multiple marine chapters to come to life with their own rules, rather than highlighting the big four and then forcing long stretches of time between their updates, while denying it to things like SoB, orks, and tyranids, who could use some codex love
Thats the space marine army. The only special thing that's not a marine is Servitors... and wolves I guess.
So you list these things out and then have a page or two for each chapter.
So the Blood Angels chapter page would say something like "Sanguinary Guard (Veterans armed with blah blah blah) Specialist"
And then you have a rule for Specialist, meaning that it can only be used when using Blood Angel Characters or a Captain with the Mark of Blood Angels.
All marines are the same. Black Templars have absolutly nothing special that makes them deserve their own codex.
They can be summed up with
"Tactical Marines 4-9 plus sarge... may take up to 10 additional scouts added to this unit" and "When this unit take a wound from an enemy shooting attack
and FAILS ITS MORAL TEST it instead passes the test and may move so many inches forward or whatever". I don't see why Templars run forwards when shot.
You'd think that the Khorne Berzerkers would have an improved version of this rule.
As soon as you provide a toolbox, everyone will mathhammer it, and the result will be 1-3 uberchapters and a bunch of options where you can waste your points. Just pick up a random codex, pick one of the generic HQs and count the number of possible combinations. Then count the number of combinations you actually see used in games. Ever seen a big mek on a bike?
I really think the C:SM does it best. You pick up a chapter leader, and your army transforms some of its rules to fit with that chapter. If rumors are correct, Eldar now pretty much do the same.
That said, I don't think BT should be rolled into the normal codex. Unlike BA or DA, it actually feels different to play against black templars, because the slight alteration of many units change their roles much.
Vaktathi wrote: There are multiple reasons for this. GW has shown that it has had issues updating and attending to each faction in turn, and each extra marine thingy makes that take even longer.
6th Edition has pretty much disproven that point.
And it is worth remembering that not all updates are equal. Dark Eldar or Necrons in 6th edition were - each on their own - larger releases with more miniatures than the Blood Angels, Grey Knights and Space Wolves releases taken together. Space Marine books don't take up much room in the miniature pipeline. That is the point. They are quick and easy releases for GW. Cutting them wouldn't mean faster or more frequent updates for the other Codexes. It would only mean less updates for 40K in the same time period.
Vaktathi wrote: I'm hoping they just roll it into the SM codex. That's what they should have done with DA's and BA's at the very least, and SW's as well. You can fit everything about the Templars, rules-wise, in 2-3 pages as an addendum to a C:SM list (same with the other Loyalist chapters too really...), they don't need their own book. If they must be their own separate army, well, that's what Forgeworld really should be for.
Yeah there is some sense to this...however, being that DA and BA and SW have their own books, I think BT should be represented as well. If for 7th edition they decide to roll them all together in to one book and discuss the various rules there, that would make sense.
Until that point, I think Black Templars deserve their book. They are so much more different than standard marines.
I think there are people that have voted to see black templars get rolled in to the SM codex because they think all the SM chapters should be listed in one codex. I can also see Black Templars getting updated as one more codex in your way to your armies update.
I just don't feel they shouldv'e gained one to begin with, they aren't even a founding chapter!
This is probably the seventh time I've said this: there are no "first founding Chapters". Chapters didn't exist until the second founding. The Black Templars, Crimson Fists and every other second founding Chapter (which includes the Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and the Salamanders) were all part of the Legiones Astartes; attributing the deeds of, for example, the Imperial Fists Legion to the Imperial Fists Chapter alone is incorrect, as the Crimson Fists, Black Templars and Soul Drinkers were all part of the Legion. It's not until the third founding that Chapters that took no part in the Heresy are created. Thus, Codex: Black Templars is, for the purpouses of this argument, just as justified as Codex: Blood Angels or Codex: Space Wolves.
"Tactical Marines 4-9 plus sarge... may take up to 10 additional scouts added to this unit" and "When this unit take a wound from an enemy shooting attack
and FAILS ITS MORAL TEST it instead passes the test and may move so many inches forward or whatever". I don't see why Templars run forwards when shot.
You'd think that the Khorne Berzerkers would have an improved version of this rule.
Considering you don't even know that there's no Black Templars Sergeants outside Command Squads I have difficulty taking you seriously.
Vaktathi wrote: I'm hoping they just roll it into the SM codex. That's what they should have done with DA's and BA's at the very least, and SW's as well. You can fit everything about the Templars, rules-wise, in 2-3 pages as an addendum to a C:SM list (same with the other Loyalist chapters too really...), they don't need their own book. If they must be their own separate army, well, that's what Forgeworld really should be for.
Yeah there is some sense to this...however, being that DA and BA and SW have their own books, I think BT should be represented as well. If for 7th edition they decide to roll them all together in to one book and discuss the various rules there, that would make sense.
Until that point, I think Black Templars deserve their book. They are so much more different than standard marines.
I think there are people that have voted to see black templars get rolled in to the SM codex because they think all the SM chapters should be listed in one codex. I can also see Black Templars getting updated as one more codex in your way to your armies update.
I just don't feel they shouldv'e gained one to begin with, they aren't even a founding chapter!
This is probably the seventh time I've said this: there are no "first founding Chapters". Chapters didn't exist until the second founding. The Black Templars, Crimson Fists and every other second founding Chapter (which includes the Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and the Salamanders) were all part of the Legiones Astartes; attributing the deeds of, for example, the Imperial Fists Legion to the Imperial Fists Chapter alone is incorrect, as the Crimson Fists, Black Templars and Soul Drinkers were all part of the Legion. It's not until the third founding that Chapters that took no part in the Heresy are created. Thus, Codex: Black Templars is, for the purpouses of this argument, just as justified as Codex: Blood Angels or Codex: Space Wolves.
So he put Chapter instead of Legion. The Blood Angles and Space Wolves and Ultramarines were part of the FIRST founding. Which is what I'm assuming he was refering to.
The Black Templars were never a Legion. They're just Blood Angels with black armour and no jump packs.
They hate psykers? No big deal... so do I. So when my Blood Angels aren't using Mephiston I guess I'm playing Black Templars?
On a side note... the Soul Drinkers are a second founding chapter? I hate those books with a passion that boarders on fanatical. Those books are worse than anything Matt Ward can come up with.
Vaktathi wrote: I'm hoping they just roll it into the SM codex. That's what they should have done with DA's and BA's at the very least, and SW's as well. You can fit everything about the Templars, rules-wise, in 2-3 pages as an addendum to a C:SM list (same with the other Loyalist chapters too really...), they don't need their own book. If they must be their own separate army, well, that's what Forgeworld really should be for.
Yeah there is some sense to this...however, being that DA and BA and SW have their own books, I think BT should be represented as well. If for 7th edition they decide to roll them all together in to one book and discuss the various rules there, that would make sense.
Until that point, I think Black Templars deserve their book. They are so much more different than standard marines.
I think there are people that have voted to see black templars get rolled in to the SM codex because they think all the SM chapters should be listed in one codex. I can also see Black Templars getting updated as one more codex in your way to your armies update.
I just don't feel they shouldv'e gained one to begin with, they aren't even a founding chapter!
This is probably the seventh time I've said this: there are no "first founding Chapters". Chapters didn't exist until the second founding. The Black Templars, Crimson Fists and every other second founding Chapter (which includes the Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and the Salamanders) were all part of the Legiones Astartes; attributing the deeds of, for example, the Imperial Fists Legion to the Imperial Fists Chapter alone is incorrect, as the Crimson Fists, Black Templars and Soul Drinkers were all part of the Legion. It's not until the third founding that Chapters that took no part in the Heresy are created. Thus, Codex: Black Templars is, for the purpouses of this argument, just as justified as Codex: Blood Angels or Codex: Space Wolves.
So he put Chapter instead of Legion. The Blood Angles and Space Wolves and Ultramarines were part of the FIRST founding. Which is what I'm assuming he was refering to.
The Black Templars were never a Legion. They're just Blood Angels with black armour and no jump packs.
They hate psykers? No big deal... so do I. So when my Blood Angels aren't using Mephiston I guess I'm playing Black Templars?
On a side note... the Soul Drinkers are a second founding chapter? I hate those books with a passion that boarders on fanatical. Those books are worse than anything Matt Ward can come up with.
The Black Templars, and every other Second Founding Chapter (which includes the Imperial Fists, Salamanders and the Ultramarines) are all just as much a part of their respective Legions as the other. The Imperial Fists Chapter was created during the Second Founding, just as the Black Templars and Crimson Fists. The Imperial Fists Chapter doesn't have a longer history than the Crimson Fists, for example. They were all in the same Legion.
As an example, let's pretend that the Imperial Fists pre-heresy Legion was called the Über Legion. Once the Heresy resolves, they split into the Imperial Fists, Crimson Fists, Black Templars and the Soul Drinkers. Why would any of these Chapters have a greater claim to status and recognition than any of the others? It's not until the Third Founding that Chapters are created whose history does not include the events of the Horus Heresy.
Nope. Becasue there is no model for it. And it's a stupid choice to take over SAG or KKF.
Don't get me wrong... I take Big Meks in mega armour, but only in 2 FoC and he's attached to a unit of lootaz in a battlewagon (SaPftw!).
Putting a Mek on a bike is like... taking Torquemada and no Henchmen. It has nothing to do with variety, just common sense.
Exactly my point. There is no model for Warboss on a Bike either (except for the Sardsnark model from Forgeworld), but you see self-build versions everywhere. However, putting a bigmek on a bike, even though very fluffy for a KoS army, is a total waste of points and HQ slots, since it doesn't do anything special or good at all.
Pretty much the same would happen if GW provided a big marine-chapter-toolbox. Guess how many people would pick Stubborn, Fearless in Combat or Red Thirst if you had to trade away Combat Tactics for it?
Heres another way to put it Walrus.....Sigusmund and the entire IF contintingent that would soon become the Black Templars allfought in the Siege of Terra. Girlyman and the Imperial Navy were going to start their own heresy party and fire on IF if they didnt split and follow the Codex. Dorn took one for the team and split the Legion, and Siggy took his boys and continued the Crusade.
But I don't believe if you are from a Founding Legion you don't need much of something new, especially when other races could pull off what specialty you are doing without it being more marine.
Am I the only person who missed the obvious point - Black Templars are no longer listed as a 40K army on the armies list on the GW website? Sisters still are and all they have a weak WD codex, but Black Templars are just not there. It's as if they had been written out and removed from the game. I think this is no mistake and BT will not get a new codex and will likely be the key chapter in a SM codex add on giving special rules for chapters which do not differ enough to justify a separate codex.
Isengard wrote: Am I the only person who missed the obvious point - Black Templars are no longer listed as a 40K army on the armies list on the GW website? Sisters still are and all they have a weak WD codex, but Black Templars are just not there. It's as if they had been written out and removed from the game. I think this is no mistake and BT will not get a new codex and will likely be the key chapter in a SM codex add on giving special rules for chapters which do not differ enough to justify a separate codex.
They are in a sub-heading of Space Marines... same as Dark Angels were before their 6th Edition book and Blood Angels before their 5th Edition Book.
With the amount of money GW make off new releases each month, it's hard to see why they wouldn't do a new codex for them.
We all know that Matt Ward would butcher it anyway, giving them Sigismund as a buffed Emperor's Champ alternative, a Flyer that carpet bombs using Holy Orbs of Antioch, a Monstrous Creature that's a Dreadknight-come-Titan with a sword the size of a Baneblade and can assault after Deep Striking, and some dodgy underlying Knights of the Round Table theme to the whole thing.
As long as they were returned to their rightful place as the go-to guys for Space Marine close combat funzies, I'd pick them back up again. "Enemy models that are charged by any unit from the Codex: Black Templars" army book cannot fire overwatch." - Job done, BTCC goodness returns!!!
Enceladus wrote: With the amount of money GW make off new releases each month, it's hard to see why they wouldn't do a new codex for them.
We all know that Matt Ward would butcher it anyway, giving them Sigismund as a buffed Emperor's Champ alternative, a Flyer that carpet bombs using Holy Orbs of Antioch, a Monstrous Creature that's a Dreadknight-come-Titan with a sword the size of a Baneblade and can assault after Deep Striking, and some dodgy underlying Knights of the Round Table theme to the whole thing.
As long as they were returned to their rightful place as the go-to guys for Space Marine close combat funzies, I'd pick them back up again. "Enemy models that are charged by any unit from the Codex: Black Templars" army book cannot fire overwatch." - Job done, BTCC goodness returns!!!
I would do this with grenades that negate Overwatch. Free frags but pay for BT grenades. Were already used to paying for nades already...
Charging from Zeal would be a nice touch. Used to be able to do it too.
I think they'll update the Ork Codex next, but down the line I'd imagine they'll update the other Space Marine Chapter Codices - maybe even introduce new ones.
Has GW ever taken something from FW and had it listed on their site with the core models? The reason I am asking is because I think the chaplain dreadnought would make a perfect addition to the Black Templar codex.
Icculus wrote: Has GW ever taken something from FW and had it listed on their site with the core models? The reason I am asking is because I think the chaplain dreadnought would make a perfect addition to the Black Templar codex.
Not really, but they did take the Trygon model and develop a similar plastic model from it.
Whether we like them or not, Black Templars will most likely recieve a new codex in the future. Why? Because it makes no sense to cut a product line that sells.
actually i just read in the Space Marines rumor thread that there had been some issues since the Baneblade came over from FW. it screwed over FW's profits and only marginally affected GWs. So some story about how they will not be moving very much over from here forward.
Anyway, Sigismund would be a very cool addition to the codex, or even their own Land Raider Crusader. BA have their predator, the BT should have their LRC.
Icculus wrote: actually i just read in the Space Marines rumor thread that there had been some issues since the Baneblade came over from FW. it screwed over FW's profits and only marginally affected GWs. So some story about how they will not be moving very much over from here forward.
Anyway, Sigismund would be a very cool addition to the codex, or even their own Land Raider Crusader. BA have their predator, the BT should have their LRC.
The LRC is the 'BTLRC' the BT's found the design for it and then distributed among the other chapters (BTs can share)
Icculus wrote: actually i just read in the Space Marines rumor thread that there had been some issues since the Baneblade came over from FW. it screwed over FW's profits and only marginally affected GWs. So some story about how they will not be moving very much over from here forward.
Anyway, Sigismund would be a very cool addition to the codex, or even their own Land Raider Crusader. BA have their predator, the BT should have their LRC.
The LRC is the 'BTLRC' the BT's found the design for it and then distributed among the other chapters (BTs can share)
I know it's their design to begin with ,but after all of these years you would think they would have had some more time to develop it, or perhaps would have the actual original design while the design everyone is using now was actually a modified version.
Icculus wrote: actually i just read in the Space Marines rumor thread that there had been some issues since the Baneblade came over from FW. it screwed over FW's profits and only marginally affected GWs. So some story about how they will not be moving very much over from here forward.
Anyway, Sigismund would be a very cool addition to the codex, or even their own Land Raider Crusader. BA have their predator, the BT should have their LRC.
The LRC is the 'BTLRC' the BT's found the design for it and then distributed among the other chapters (BTs can share)
I know it's their design to begin with ,but after all of these years you would think they would have had some more time to develop it, or perhaps would have the actual original design while the design everyone is using now was actually a modified version.
Icculus wrote: actually i just read in the Space Marines rumor thread that there had been some issues since the Baneblade came over from FW. it screwed over FW's profits and only marginally affected GWs. So some story about how they will not be moving very much over from here forward.
Anyway, Sigismund would be a very cool addition to the codex, or even their own Land Raider Crusader. BA have their predator, the BT should have their LRC.
The LRC is the 'BTLRC' the BT's found the design for it and then distributed among the other chapters (BTs can share)
I know it's their design to begin with ,but after all of these years you would think they would have had some more time to develop it, or perhaps would have the actual original design while the design everyone is using now was actually a modified version.
Read the BT fluff, changes are not really that tolerated, especially when it come to ancient tech like Land Raiders. It took a while for the designs to be accepted even by the Tech-priests, much less other Marine Chapters.
Changes aren't all that tolerated, but the changes that do get accepted are always the best. That's why the LRC WAS accepted. Because it was a great idea. GW could easily write some fluff about how a LRC was modified to fit a very serious or dire situation and now has a demolisher cannon and 5 typhoon missile launchers on it. Okay that example is extreme but you get the idea.
First off lets get one thing straight Black Templars WILL NOT in any way shape or form be rolled into the Codex: Space Marines. With the advent of Supplemental Codices, BT at worst, are likely to get one of these if we don't get a full codex. To be honest if anything armies are going to be REMOVED from Codex: Space Marines and given Supplemental Codices as well. All the Xenos players need to stop complaining that "there are too much Power Armour Codices" as GW is not wasting any time redoing your Codices, you guys have seen the vast majority of updates post 6th (and I think you should mind you). Right now there is a perfect balance between Imperial and Xenos (8 to 8 Codices) and I'm sorry that all but one Imperial Codex has Power Armour but tough, thats life, deal with it. The internet communitity needs to abandon this absured "BT getting rolled" crap and focus on something more believible...
@d3m01iti0n I'm with you in this fight as a fellow Black Templar!!!!!
Marshal Ommadon wrote: First off lets get one thing straight Black Templars WILL NOT in any way shape or form be rolled into the Codex: Space Marines. With the advent of Supplemental Codices, BT at worst, are likely to get one of these if we don't get a full codex. To be honest if anything armies are going to be REMOVED from Codex: Space Marines and given Supplemental Codices as well. All the Xenos players need to stop complaining that "there are too much Power Armour Codices" as GW is not wasting any time redoing your Codices, you guys have seen the vast majority of updates post 6th (and I think you should mind you). Right now there is a perfect balance between Imperial and Xenos (8 to 8 Codices) and I'm sorry that all but one Imperial Codex has Power Armour but tough, thats life, deal with it. The internet communitity needs to abandon this absured "BT getting rolled" crap and focus on something more believible...
@d3m01iti0n I'm with you in this fight as a fellow Black Templar!!!!!
Supplement makes the most sense, ala the upcoming Eldar book. The good thing about it is the ability to:
1. Say current when the C:SM gets updated again.
2. Allows other supplements to expand additional chapters beyond a special character or two.
3. I like books.
Marshal Ommadon wrote: First off lets get one thing straight Black Templars WILL NOT in any way shape or form be rolled into the Codex: Space Marines. With the advent of Supplemental Codices, BT at worst, are likely to get one of these if we don't get a full codex. To be honest if anything armies are going to be REMOVED from Codex: Space Marines and given Supplemental Codices as well. All the Xenos players need to stop complaining that "there are too much Power Armour Codices" as GW is not wasting any time redoing your Codices, you guys have seen the vast majority of updates post 6th (and I think you should mind you). Right now there is a perfect balance between Imperial and Xenos (8 to 8 Codices) and I'm sorry that all but one Imperial Codex has Power Armour but tough, thats life, deal with it. The internet communitity needs to abandon this absured "BT getting rolled" crap and focus on something more believible...
@d3m01iti0n I'm with you in this fight as a fellow Black Templar!!!!!
First post, cool story bro.
Oranges are round.
As long as we are saying things that are irrelevant I wanted to jump in.
But seriously, that's like hearing someone in a debate give a poignant and relatively well spoken response, then dismissing him because he is wearing a red shirt. Sounds like modern politics.
d3m01iti0n wrote: Its DakkaDakka man. That kind of crap is par for the course. Personally if I want worthwhile conversation I post elsewhere.
Though I admit it will be fun when I necro this thread with a pic of me holding the new BT book.
Haha that will be a pretty good necro post. I'll exalt it.
As will I, I'd be happy for my thread to be necro'd by that because I want a new BT book. The only reason I put this up is to see what people thought, never knew DA had a similar one
Marshal Ommadon wrote: First off lets get one thing straight Black Templars WILL NOT in any way shape or form be rolled into the Codex: Space Marines.
Such certainty is based on...?
With the advent of Supplemental Codices, BT at worst, are likely to get one of these if we don't get a full codex.
perhaps, but these books also aren't really sub-lists from what it's sounding like so far, more like the WHFB Heraldry book unless something new has popped up.
To be honest if anything armies are going to be REMOVED from Codex: Space Marines and given Supplemental Codices as well.
Again, based on...?
All the Xenos players need to stop complaining that "there are too much Power Armour Codices" as GW is not wasting any time redoing your Codices, you guys have seen the vast majority of updates post 6th (and I think you should mind you).
6E armies as of today:
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Chaos Daemons
Tau.
How are Xenos the vast majority of 6E updates? There's exactly 1 Xenos book in there, 2 if you really want to count Daemons amongst them. The other two are Space Marines.
Right now there is a perfect balance between Imperial and Xenos (8 to 8 Codices) and I'm sorry that all but one Imperial Codex has Power Armour but tough, thats life, deal with it. The internet communitity needs to abandon this absured "BT getting rolled" crap and focus on something more believible...
Nobody is saying for certain that it is, only "should it be?" and "it's possible".
Marshal Ommadon wrote: First off lets get one thing straight Black Templars WILL NOT in any way shape or form be rolled into the Codex: Space Marines. With the advent of Supplemental Codices, BT at worst, are likely to get one of these if we don't get a full codex. To be honest if anything armies are going to be REMOVED from Codex: Space Marines and given Supplemental Codices as well. All the Xenos players need to stop complaining that "there are too much Power Armour Codices" as GW is not wasting any time redoing your Codices, you guys have seen the vast majority of updates post 6th (and I think you should mind you). Right now there is a perfect balance between Imperial and Xenos (8 to 8 Codices) and I'm sorry that all but one Imperial Codex has Power Armour but tough, thats life, deal with it. The internet communitity needs to abandon this absured "BT getting rolled" crap and focus on something more believible...
@d3m01iti0n I'm with you in this fight as a fellow Black Templar!!!!!
First post, cool story bro.
Oranges are round.
As long as we are saying things that are irrelevant I wanted to jump in.
But seriously, that's like hearing someone in a debate give a poignant and relatively well spoken response, then dismissing him because he is wearing a red shirt. Sounds like modern politics.
Considering his major argument is simply down to "Stop arguing because nothings gonna happen!". Which, one can argue all they want about.
Regardless of the fact, having an imperial balance to xenos (I'm sorry what?) Nobody cares, it's still too much, I play chaos and it's still too much! It makes the Meta far too close with too many space marine armies, I wouldn't mind seeing more "Less power armored" armies simply because we might actually see something beyond 4/4/4/4/3+ as the standard.
Then you would love Black Templars with their 10 Crusader/10 initiate blobs. (initiates is BT for Scout). Thats plenty of 4+ armor for you to shoot down before the righteous zeal gets to your doorstep.
I still don't see why BT deserve their own codex. With GW grasping (poorly) back to its roots (the idea of 6th being like 2nd),
if you play BTs you should be worried. The BTs started as a 4 page list of reprinted rules with a few minor exceptions.
They had totake the Emperors Champion, they had access to the Crusader, Storm Shields on jump infantry, Zeal and Vows.
In other words... To capture the oringinal feel of the BT all that is needed is a character who grants Zeal, Vows and can take a body guard with sheilds.
This character? The Emperors Champion.
Done. One small paragraph in the Characters section of the new Space Marine Codex.
Weve had this conversation man. The same could be said for any chapter outside of the Smurfs. They started will small changes and have been since expanded upon. BT is sitting on that threshold. Their playstyle is unique enough now with a 9 year old book that there is a ton of potential to expand that feel. How do you think DA and BA got where they are today? Updates.
That being said, you better be at my place the 8th! Feel the wrath of the Pabst Crusade!!&
d3m01iti0n wrote: Weve had this conversation man. The same could be said for any chapter outside of the Smurfs. They started will small changes and have been since expanded upon. BT is sitting on that threshold. Their playstyle is unique enough now with a 9 year old book that there is a ton of potential to expand that feel. How do you think DA and BA got where they are today? Updates.
That being said, you better be at my place the 8th! Feel the wrath of the Pabst Crusade!!&
Hmm... BTs have Helbrect, Grimaldus and the Emperors Champion. Then Sword Bretheren. Did I leave out anything unique? Oh yeah they take Marines and Scouts in one squad.
Blood Angel have Dante, the Sanguinor, Mephiston, Astorath, Curbulo, Tycho, Furioso, Furioso Libby, Death Company, DC Dread, Sanguinary Guard and Baal Preds.
Dark Angels have a ton of unique stuff as well. The BTs are just space marines with a few minor rules. BA and DA are two armies with several unique units and rules.
Did you just ignore the part where he said they have had time to update? Let's go back 9 years and look at what the Dark Angels had then, or what the Blood Angels had.
Icculus wrote: Did you just ignore the part where he said they have had time to update? Let's go back 9 years and look at what the Dark Angels had then, or what the Blood Angels had.
Everything they have now. Except one character and a dred. The BTs have had years to update. I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
The blood angels originally had a few special characters and death company if my memory serves me correctly, maybe not even that. The 5th ed update crammed them full of new stuff. You have to remember that when BT were being done GW was in a minimalist phase of codex development where everything was streamlined and cut down. (Eg compare 3rd ed CSM to 4th ed CSM) so their design process was slap a few special rules on them, add one or two new units and make a slight modification to tac marines and call it a day. However they have an opportunity to do a really unique and vastly improved Templar codex this edition with new plastic kits that allow them to go nuts on skulls and purity seals and all those little grim dark things that GW designers get off on. I seriously doubt that they will let an opportunity like that go to waste considering how well space marines in general sell.
Blood Angels were a white dwarf supplement when the BT codex came out. two years later they got their first codex, then in 2010 they got their 5th edition update.
You are right, they have had years to update, and it is about time they did so.
Icculus wrote: You are right, they have had years to update, and it is about time they did so.
Agreed, sooner the better. I tried BT a few months back and they were pretty good (if a little fiddly and out of date). They are the nearest thing we have to Great Crusade SM because that's basically what they're doing even 10,000 years on. They've been in the shadows for too long and I seriously hope they do them right.
Icculus wrote: Blood Angels were a white dwarf supplement when the BT codex came out. two years later they got their first codex, then in 2010 they got their 5th edition update.
You are right, they have had years to update, and it is about time they did so.
In 3rd ed I believe that BA had 4 special characters (Dante, Corbulo, Mephiston, Tycho) maybe Lemartes, can't remember. They also had 2 unique units (Furioso Dread and Death Company) the Baal predator was introduced at the later date
So, the Blood angels received at least 2 new special characters, two new dreadnoughts, a new elite unit, ASMs as troops, fast rhinos, sanguinary priests, storm ravens, possibly Baal predators an enhanced special rules since the Black Templars have received their own unique codex.
So you are quite right, the Blood Angels have gotten a lot in updates since the templars came out.
Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and EC. They can bring back Draco, the Durandal Dread, and add TANKRED.
10 Initiate/10 Neophyte blobs.
Righteous/Unmatched Zeal moves.
Sword Brethern, with options for TDA and skill upgrades. These skills confer to HQs when used as a Command Squad. Tank Hunter confers to a gun emplacement. Dual heavy weapons for TDA.
Melta bombs on all jump infantry.
PotMS and Blessed Hull. Dedicated LRCs. LRCs were previously
exclusive to BT.
Cheap Typhoons with an emphasis on missile spam. We lost the Whirlwind for some dumb reason.
Holy Hand Grenade.
Im possibly missing some things as I dont have the book handy, and some Marines may have gained a few of these things since then. But I cannot emphasize this enough: its a nine year old book. The rest of the Mahreens have been updated since then. These are the things that made them stand out in 4th edition, and moreso than BA and DA at the time. Any further arguments towards their uniqueness should be directed towards GWs failure to update them during the last DECADE.
Icculus wrote: Blood Angels were a white dwarf supplement when the BT codex came out.two years later they got their first codex, then in 2010 they got their 5th edition update.
No to the first part, no to the red part and a resounding math failure encompasses the 3rd despite its factual correctness.
Spoiler:
All right kiddies gather round and Uncle Auston will tell you a story. The moral is don't say thinks that are blatantly false.
In 1996 the Blood Angels received their first Codex along with the Dark Angels.
1996 That was 2nd Edition kiddies when sustained fire was king and a Predator with twin linked assault cannons fired 18 STR 9 shots. And the Black Templar were still 2 years away from becoming an army centered around thier one special character: the Emperors Champion. Coincidentally 1998 is the year the first Codex: Blood Angels was published as a supplement to C:SM. At this time BA had 6 special characters and a limited FOC selection from C:SM.
1998 Don't worry kiddies it was still only 3rd edition the Blood Angels had two codexes and the first Black Templar army list was still 2 years away.
The Dark days for the foot slogging crusaders finally ended in 2000 with the publication of the first BT army list in Codex: Armageddon.
2000 Finally the Black Templar had a book to call thier ow...share with Xenos.
But fear not FIVE years later the judicious crusaders of foot slogging assault would have their day in the sun!
2005 A mere 7 years after the second Blood Angels Codex. Thier...only codex to date.
Two years later the White Dwarf supplemental codex was circulated by the evil GW Studio gutting the Emperor's Brave Crimson Heroes.
2007 At this point maybe some of you were wondering what Special Characters that codex might include; well children 5 of the 6 same characters (and models) from 9 years earlier.
Three years later our valiant skyborne warriors received a much deserved update...or so we thought. Then it was published.
2010 /Necron Brofist
And the New 40K was born. With stupid flyers.
Just in case you were wondering 2010 was the 4th codex to feature the blood angels and included the first new units and characters in 12 years. It also includes the same 5 characters from 1998 to Present as the core of the the army only one of which has received a facelift in 15 years.
None of the arguments advanced so far by BT players or those that want to roll up the codex really amount to a hill of beans as far as GW is concerned.
GW DOES NOT CARE:
How many special units codex y has compared to codex z
Whether or not the BT have their own playstyle
etc etc etc posted in this thread
All that matters is how well they think the BT Codex is helping them sell models. GW knows exactly how many BT books they have sold and exactly how many BT specific character models they have sold. From this data they will decide to keep the BT in their own codex or roll them up.
By some objective criterion the BT could be the best designed codex ever created but if GW does not think it is selling models it would be in danger of being discontinued.
I think its hard to predict because the only thing anyone here knows is the anecdotal evidence of how popular they are in there local area. Here they are nonexistent, elsewhere I have no idea. I would not be surprised if GW rolled them up or completely refurbished them.
Icculus wrote: Blood Angels were a white dwarf supplement when the BT codex came out.two years later they got their first codex, then in 2010 they got their 5th edition update.
No to the first part, no to the red part and a resounding math failure encompasses the 3rd despite its factual correctness.
Just in case you were wondering 2010 was the 4th codex to feature the blood angels and included the first new units and characters in 12 years. It also includes the same 5 characters from 1998 to Present as the core of the the army only one of which has received a facelift in 15 years.
I did know about all those, however I may have got the number of special characters wrong. My point was that before 5th BA were just space marines with a few new units, not so different to BT.
To pour some gas on the fire, the announcement of the Armageddon Game planed for 2014 names Ultramarines, Blood Angels and Salamanders as playable Marine Chapters, but not Black Templars, even though they had one of the biggest forces on Armageddon during the second war.
Jidmah wrote: To pour some gas on the fire, the announcement of the Armageddon Game planed for 2014 names Ultramarines, Blood Angels and Salamanders as playable Marine Chapters, but not Black Templars, even though they had one of the biggest forces on Armageddon during the second war.
Maybe its a boon to have Salamanders and Blood Angels there....
We don't need more UM games.
Icculus wrote: Blood Angels were a white dwarf supplement when the BT codex came out. two years later they got their first codex, then in 2010 they got their 5th edition update.
You are right, they have had years to update, and it is about time they did so.
I would hope after the Sisters and the flyers debacles that GW had learned better than to use WD to update armies.
Jidmah wrote: To pour some gas on the fire, the announcement of the Armageddon Game planed for 2014 names Ultramarines, Blood Angels and Salamanders as playable Marine Chapters, but not Black Templars, even though they had one of the biggest forces on Armageddon during the second war.
The 3 you name were the main in the SECOND war, BT were primarily in the THIRD war, so maybe that's why?
Jidmah wrote: To pour some gas on the fire, the announcement of the Armageddon Game planed for 2014 names Ultramarines, Blood Angels and Salamanders as playable Marine Chapters, but not Black Templars, even though they had one of the biggest forces on Armageddon during the second war.
I dont think this has to do anything to do with it, even when I think that the Templars will be put back into the C:SM.
Jidmah wrote: To pour some gas on the fire, the announcement of the Armageddon Game planed for 2014 names Ultramarines, Blood Angels and Salamanders as playable Marine Chapters, but not Black Templars, even though they had one of the biggest forces on Armageddon during the second war.
Has a lot more to do with it being an new take on the 1992 Battle for Armageddon which is based on the 2nd War.
I could see them making Black Templar a supplemental to Codex: Space Marines.
Take away Librarians and Devastators, add in the Emperor's Champion as a choice much like Techmarines are for Dark Angels (don't take up an HQ slot, can't be the warlord).
And then drink in those sweet sweet tears when they can't take Furious Charge / Tank Hunters as veteran upgrades anymore. Or 2 CML on 5man Terminators, or really cheap TMLs, or POTMS... >.> (though those things don't really make up for the lack of toys / over priced things they buy, but there will be tears when they lose those things and all the other 3rd/4th edition toys they still get to use that other marine books dont).
Crazyterran wrote: I could see them making Black Templar a supplemental to Codex: Space Marines.
Take away Librarians and Devastators, add in the Emperor's Champion as a choice much like Techmarines are for Dark Angels (don't take up an HQ slot, can't be the warlord).
And then drink in those sweet sweet tears when they can't take Furious Charge / Tank Hunters as veteran upgrades anymore. Or 2 CML on 5man Terminators, or really cheap TMLs, or POTMS... >.> (though those things don't really make up for the lack of toys / over priced things they buy, but there will be tears when they lose those things and all the other 3rd/4th edition toys they still get to use that other marine books dont).
...and the Crusader Squads. And Righteous Zeal. And no Sergeants. And no separate Scout Squads. But sure, keep being petty if that's your cup of tea.
Crazyterran wrote: I could see them making Black Templar a supplemental to Codex: Space Marines.
Take away Librarians and Devastators, add in the Emperor's Champion as a choice much like Techmarines are for Dark Angels (don't take up an HQ slot, can't be the warlord).
And then drink in those sweet sweet tears when they can't take Furious Charge / Tank Hunters as veteran upgrades anymore. Or 2 CML on 5man Terminators, or really cheap TMLs, or POTMS... >.> (though those things don't really make up for the lack of toys / over priced things they buy, but there will be tears when they lose those things and all the other 3rd/4th edition toys they still get to use that other marine books dont).
...and the Crusader Squads. And Righteous Zeal. And no Sergeants. And no separate Scout Squads. But sure, keep being petty if that's your cup of tea.
I don't think he's being petty. He's being realistic. The BT are outdated... we can all agree on that. When they get updated (see: Codex: Space Marines) they will lose all of the outdated rules they have.
If some people are so fond of supplements... lets cut their dex into a bunch of supplements :.
Codex UM: main dex => basic tactical marine.
You want more? buy the fast assault supplement, and/or the elite supplement and/or the heavy support supplement or a one click deal of all 4 at a "discount" of 0 %. YAY?
Now if we can return to serious mode?
Any update updates the rules to 6th ed.
There is no benefit for GW gained with less BT. But they could aim at a SM release around GDUK. Playing safe along those 6th ed releases.
BT are rather stuffed " in Reserve " , like SoB.
Crazyterran wrote: I could see them making Black Templar a supplemental to Codex: Space Marines.
Take away Librarians and Devastators, add in the Emperor's Champion as a choice much like Techmarines are for Dark Angels (don't take up an HQ slot, can't be the warlord).
And then drink in those sweet sweet tears when they can't take Furious Charge / Tank Hunters as veteran upgrades anymore. Or 2 CML on 5man Terminators, or really cheap TMLs, or POTMS... >.> (though those things don't really make up for the lack of toys / over priced things they buy, but there will be tears when they lose those things and all the other 3rd/4th edition toys they still get to use that other marine books dont).
...and the Crusader Squads. And Righteous Zeal. And no Sergeants. And no separate Scout Squads. But sure, keep being petty if that's your cup of tea.
I don't think he's being petty. He's being realistic. The BT are outdated... we can all agree on that. When they get updated (see: Codex: Space Marines) they will lose all of the outdated rules they have.
Wait, the "outdated" stuff that is the core of how BT are different in-game from Vanilla? My point was that simply including the Emperor's Champion and calling it a day would remove most of what makes BT play as BT, not to mention that it'd invalidate Helbrecht and Grimaldus.
Crazyterran wrote: I could see them making Black Templar a supplemental to Codex: Space Marines.
Take away Librarians and Devastators, add in the Emperor's Champion as a choice much like Techmarines are for Dark Angels (don't take up an HQ slot, can't be the warlord).
And then drink in those sweet sweet tears when they can't take Furious Charge / Tank Hunters as veteran upgrades anymore. Or 2 CML on 5man Terminators, or really cheap TMLs, or POTMS... >.> (though those things don't really make up for the lack of toys / over priced things they buy, but there will be tears when they lose those things and all the other 3rd/4th edition toys they still get to use that other marine books dont).
...and the Crusader Squads. And Righteous Zeal. And no Sergeants. And no separate Scout Squads. But sure, keep being petty if that's your cup of tea.
I don't think he's being petty. He's being realistic. The BT are outdated... we can all agree on that. When they get updated (see: Codex: Space Marines) they will lose all of the outdated rules they have.
Wait, the "outdated" stuff that is the core of how BT are different in-game from Vanilla? My point was that simply including the Emperor's Champion and calling it a day would remove most of what makes BT play as BT, not to mention that it'd invalidate Helbrecht and Grimaldus.
If only there were some way to communicate the unique nature of the BT in side the framework of C:SM...
Oh...right. Right bunch of cross-covered snowflakes you are.
People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
JWhex wrote: People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
Everyone? I know quite a few who still have fond memories of the Blood Axe supplement, the craftworld eldar, and several others.
Crazyterran wrote: I could see them making Black Templar a supplemental to Codex: Space Marines.
Take away Librarians and Devastators, add in the Emperor's Champion as a choice much like Techmarines are for Dark Angels (don't take up an HQ slot, can't be the warlord).
And then drink in those sweet sweet tears when they can't take Furious Charge / Tank Hunters as veteran upgrades anymore. Or 2 CML on 5man Terminators, or really cheap TMLs, or POTMS... >.> (though those things don't really make up for the lack of toys / over priced things they buy, but there will be tears when they lose those things and all the other 3rd/4th edition toys they still get to use that other marine books dont).
...and the Crusader Squads. And Righteous Zeal. And no Sergeants. And no separate Scout Squads. But sure, keep being petty if that's your cup of tea.
I don't think he's being petty. He's being realistic. The BT are outdated... we can all agree on that. When they get updated (see: Codex: Space Marines) they will lose all of the outdated rules they have.
Wait, the "outdated" stuff that is the core of how BT are different in-game from Vanilla? My point was that simply including the Emperor's Champion and calling it a day would remove most of what makes BT play as BT, not to mention that it'd invalidate Helbrecht and Grimaldus.
If they put the Black Templar as a supplemental, they would obviously have the Emperor's Champion, Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and any other unique Black Templar things, while disallowing units from Codex: Space Marines that do not fit into the Black Templar theme. Hell, if they just rolled the Black Templar into Codex: Space Marines, they could simply say:
"Any army that Includes an Emperor's Champion may take Scout and Tactical Squads as one units, with x limits, and replace Combat Tactics for Righteous Zeal. In addition, any army including an Emperor's Champion may not take Psykers of any kind (Librarians, allied models with psychic powers), or Devastator Squads."
Righteous Zeal would be the replacement for Combat Tactics, Crusader Squads are essentially the Black Templar version of Veteran Squads, and since every other marine book lost the other toys I mentioned, it only makes sense that Black Templar would follow suit.
Crazyterran wrote: I could see them making Black Templar a supplemental to Codex: Space Marines.
Take away Librarians and Devastators, add in the Emperor's Champion as a choice much like Techmarines are for Dark Angels (don't take up an HQ slot, can't be the warlord).
And then drink in those sweet sweet tears when they can't take Furious Charge / Tank Hunters as veteran upgrades anymore. Or 2 CML on 5man Terminators, or really cheap TMLs, or POTMS... >.> (though those things don't really make up for the lack of toys / over priced things they buy, but there will be tears when they lose those things and all the other 3rd/4th edition toys they still get to use that other marine books dont).
...and the Crusader Squads. And Righteous Zeal. And no Sergeants. And no separate Scout Squads. But sure, keep being petty if that's your cup of tea.
I don't think he's being petty. He's being realistic. The BT are outdated... we can all agree on that. When they get updated (see: Codex: Space Marines) they will lose all of the outdated rules they have.
Wait, the "outdated" stuff that is the core of how BT are different in-game from Vanilla? My point was that simply including the Emperor's Champion and calling it a day would remove most of what makes BT play as BT, not to mention that it'd invalidate Helbrecht and Grimaldus.
If they put the Black Templar as a supplemental, they would obviously have the Emperor's Champion, Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and any other unique Black Templar things, while disallowing units from Codex: Space Marines that do not fit into the Black Templar theme. Hell, if they just rolled the Black Templar into Codex: Space Marines, they could simply say:
"Any army that Includes an Emperor's Champion may take Scout and Tactical Squads as one units, with x limits, and replace Combat Tactics for Righteous Zeal. In addition, any army including an Emperor's Champion may not take Psykers of any kind (Librarians, allied models with psychic powers), or Devastator Squads."
Righteous Zeal would be the replacement for Combat Tactics, Crusader Squads are essentially the Black Templar version of Veteran Squads, and since every other marine book lost the other toys I mentioned, it only makes sense that Black Templar would follow suit.
All doable, which is why stopping at the Emperor's Champion and calling it a day would be silly.
JWhex wrote: People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
Everyone? I know quite a few who still have fond memories of the Blood Axe supplement, the craftworld eldar, and several others.
I dont think there ever was a Blood Axe supplemental Codex in 3rd edition or later. Maybe your friend's memories are faulty.
JWhex wrote: People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
Everyone? I know quite a few who still have fond memories of the Blood Axe supplement, the craftworld eldar, and several others.
I dont think there ever was a Blood Axe supplemental Codex in 3rd edition or later. Maybe your friend's memories are faulty.
I see you have confused the words coveted with reviled and loved with hated, a simple oversight I'm sure. In fact the supplemental codexes are amongst the best loved books of all time: Space Wolves, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Cityfight, Armageddon, Assassins,Eye of Terror, Craftworld Eldar, and Catachans. But you know how GW just follows the will of the people, of course they went away because WE didn't like them and we all CLAMORED for one codex to rule them all!
JWhex wrote: People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
Everyone? I know quite a few who still have fond memories of the Blood Axe supplement, the craftworld eldar, and several others.
I dont think there ever was a Blood Axe supplemental Codex in 3rd edition or later. Maybe your friend's memories are faulty.
I see you have confused the words coveted with reviled and loved with hated, a simple oversight I'm sure. In fact the supplemental codexes are amongst the best loved books of all time: Space Wolves, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Cityfight, Armageddon, Assassins,Eye of Terror, Craftworld Eldar, and Catachans. But you know how GW just follows the will of the people, of course they went away because WE didn't like them and we all CLAMORED for one codex to rule them all!
Hard to tell if you are being sarcastic or dont know wtf you are talking about. I specifically said mini-dexes for third edition which were hated. I dont have to rely on my friends memories either. The supplements that replaced the mini-codexes are very different from the pamphlets labelled codexes that first came out in third edition, those sucked big time.
Cityfight was not a mini-codex it was a supplementary set of rules for playing in city terrain, clearly you are confused and mixing things up. If you think the Dark Angel mini-codex was loved then I know for a fact you were not playing the game during 3rd edition.
I think people are too obsessed about Codex books, Codex-supplement-books, whatever.
Codexes aren't bottle-neck in GW's production. Black Library is publishing some 10 books a month. GW is throwing out the White Dwarf, the whole new Digital Products line with one or two new things each month and the Codexes.
If they'd put a few more people into the "Codex-writer-team" they could publish a Codex or two a month easy. Codex books are easy to make.
The true measure of things are the miniatures.
Comparing the first 6 Months of 2012 with the first 6 Months of 2013 showcases that quite nicely. Both had about the same amount of new kits and miniatures released for Warhammer 40K. But 2012 January-to-June had 0 Codex books. 2013 January-to-June had 4.
People really ought to start looking at the miniatures released, and at how great the discrepancies are. The Dark Eldar release alone - with some 30 new kits - was larger than Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Grey Knights and Dark Angels together. Hell, excluding the Dark Vengeance box, Dark Eldar was larger than the entirety of 40K 6th Edition so far (though Eldar are gonna tip 6th over the edge).
Releases are not equal. Codexes are not a good measure of things. GW is doing multiple Space Marine books precisely because they are "low-effort fillers" they can plug into the niches. Taking them away won't translate into more and/or other Codex books elsewhere, nor into more miniatures (which are pretty consistent). It would just mean more waiting and less releases overall.
JWhex wrote: People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
Everyone? I know quite a few who still have fond memories of the Blood Axe supplement, the craftworld eldar, and several others.
I dont think there ever was a Blood Axe supplemental Codex in 3rd edition or later. Maybe your friend's memories are faulty.
It was a Third Edition Chapter Approved list. US edition 289
JWhex wrote: None of the arguments advanced so far by BT players or those that want to roll up the codex really amount to a hill of beans as far as GW is concerned.
GW DOES NOT CARE:
How many special units codex y has compared to codex z
Whether or not the BT have their own playstyle
etc etc etc posted in this thread
All that matters is how well they think the BT Codex is helping them sell models. GW knows exactly how many BT books they have sold and exactly how many BT specific character models they have sold. From this data they will decide to keep the BT in their own codex or roll them up.
By some objective criterion the BT could be the best designed codex ever created but if GW does not think it is selling models it would be in danger of being discontinued.
I think its hard to predict because the only thing anyone here knows is the anecdotal evidence of how popular they are in there local area. Here they are nonexistent, elsewhere I have no idea. I would not be surprised if GW rolled them up or completely refurbished them.
I don't think it matters about whether they're selling right now. GW can just make a massive walker, do a couple of finecasts and then a single plastic set and make them sell like free ice creams.
JWhex wrote: People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
Everyone? I know quite a few who still have fond memories of the Blood Axe supplement, the craftworld eldar, and several others.
I dont think there ever was a Blood Axe supplemental Codex in 3rd edition or later. Maybe your friend's memories are faulty.
It was a Third Edition Chapter Approved list. US edition 289
Ok, so I went and pulled the article from my WD collection, it makes the idea that the Blood Axe list was loved even more laughable. The clan lists are basically a voluntary restriction of units in the Ork codex and some minor boss upgrade to add some flavor.
Well anyone that looked at the article you referenced would agree with me that it doesnt even qualify as a mini codex. All the different ork clans in that article are mostly a list of what Andy Chambers views as how to make a clan list from available units in the Ork codex. The entire blood axe list is in a box that takes up 1/2 of a page. Of that, 3/4 is devoted to background and pictures of 2 orks and 3 banners.
The only rule not in the codex is changing a Nob in a troops selection to a mad Dok or a Mekboy.
YIPPEE KAI YAY isnt that amazing!!!! This is the so called beloved and fondly remembered list of the Blood Axes. One paragraph, 3 sentences of pure Ork joy.
JWhex wrote: People that want supplemental codexes obviously were not around for the third edition mini-codexes which were reviled and hated by almost everyone. Anyway, GW has gone the opposite direction with expensive hardback codexes.
Everyone? I know quite a few who still have fond memories of the Blood Axe supplement, the craftworld eldar, and several others.
I dont think there ever was a Blood Axe supplemental Codex in 3rd edition or later. Maybe your friend's memories are faulty.
It was a Third Edition Chapter Approved list. US edition 289
Ok, so I went and pulled the article from my WD collection, it makes the idea that the Blood Axe list was loved even more laughable. The clan lists are basically a voluntary restriction of units in the Ork codex and some minor boss upgrade to add some flavor.
Well anyone that looked at the article you referenced would agree with me that it doesnt even qualify as a mini codex. All the different ork clans in that article are mostly a list of what Andy Chambers views as how to make a clan list from available units in the Ork codex. The entire blood axe list is in a box that takes up 1/2 of a page. Of that, 3/4 is devoted to background and pictures of 2 orks and 3 banners.
The only rule not in the codex is changing a Nob in a troops selection to a mad Dok or a Mekboy.
YIPPEE KAI YAY isnt that amazing!!!! This is the so called beloved and fondly remembered list of the Blood Axes. One paragraph, 3 sentences of pure Ork joy.
Turns out I was wrong then, blast me for mis-remembering.
Also, calm the down, no need to get as hostile as you are currently.
It used to be a Blood Axe Variant list on the actual GW site itself, back when they did the sort of thing. It's no longer up however.
I see you have confused the words coveted with reviled and loved with hated, a simple oversight I'm sure. In fact the supplemental codexes are amongst the best loved books of all time: Space Wolves, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Cityfight, Armageddon, Assassins,Eye of Terror, Craftworld Eldar, and Catachans. But you know how GW just follows the will of the people, of course they went away because WE didn't like them and we all CLAMORED for one codex to rule them all!
Hard to tell if you are being sarcastic or dont know wtf you are talking about. I specifically said mini-dexes for third edition which were hated. I dont have to rely on my friends memories either. The supplements that replaced the mini-codexes are very different from the pamphlets labelled codexes that first came out in third edition, those sucked big time.
Cityfight was not a mini-codex it was a supplementary set of rules for playing in city terrain, clearly you are confused and mixing things up. If you think the Dark Angel mini-codex was loved then I know for a fact you were not playing the game during 3rd edition.
At this point I'm pretty sure you're a nutter or illiterate, or both. But I'm also fairly sure you have no idea what you are rambling on about. the mini-dexes were not replaced until 4th edition or later; Never in 3rd, and all represented well liked armies and rules. Also I didn't mix up anything, I support supplemental Codices so I listed all the ones from 3E; including expansions, campaigns, and codices; if you were so concerned about "mini-dexes" you'd have noticed I didn't fail to mention any of them. I'm sorry that you didn't enjoy 3E, most of us did.
Eternal Crusade is unstoppable. 
need their patience...err...focus their zeal into an overwhelming return.
, we are going to keep the truth in our hearts and prevail in his name!
