Switch Theme:

Black Templars Compiled thread(Updated 10/4) PREORDERS OCT 9.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut



Bamberg / Erlangen

Yes, any cover. I mixed that up. I'll correct my post.

Imperial Guard Space Marines
 
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





Voss wrote:
Uphold the Honour of the Emperor
- All models have a 5+ invul save.
- Unmodified wound rolls of 1 and 2 against you always fail.
- You never receive the benefits of light cover

Any cover, not just light.
Its a ridiculously good vow, but you do lose out on benefiting from the -1 to hit from dense cover.


You don't need the benefits of cover to get the -1 to hit from dense cover.
   
Made in at
Fresh-Faced New User






a_typical_hero wrote:


Regarding Helbrecht and Grimaldus SPOILER WARNING:
Spoiler:

- Torchbearer fleets from the Indomitus Crusade had problems finding the Templars, due to their scattered nature.
- It was expected BT would not like Primaris stuff because they are so unpredictable and temperamentally.
- Guilliman personally met Helbrecht on the Eternal Crusader.
- Helbrecht is an instant fan girl of Guilliman, as he is a living son of the God-Emperor.
- At the same time, Helbrecht thought Guilliman is coming to lecture them and bring more boring rules to abide to with him.
- Helbrecht is fully aware of how divergent the BT are and that Big G could easily scold them for many things.
- Helbrecht easily accepted Primaris tech and attributes a spark of divinity into it that G is uncomfortable with.
- G reminds H about his duty to the wider Imperium, instead of only chasing after Ghazkull, to which H promotes several Sword Brethren to Marshalls to create new crusades, which are bolstered by the Primaris reinforcements.
- A funny remark is that some Crusades are so far ahead of where they are supposed to be, because they are SO ZEALOUS, that they can't be reached by the Primaris reinforcements.
- Word on the street is that BT have an especially high success rate in crossing the Rubicon as a reward of their faith.


I only skimmed through it, but I couldn't find any story explaining how Helbrecht and Grimaldus became Primaris. I assume they just crossed the Rubicon.


I love how both Helbrecht and Guilliman were surprised who the meeting went. I don't think Helbrecht is fanboying Guilliman. He may be a son of the Emperor, but the animosity between him and Dorn is mentioned rather clearly.

Anyway I explains quite nicely why the Templars accept the Primaris (Helbrecht sees it as a gift from the Emperor) and the bit of the high success rate of the Templars crossing the Rubicon is great (too stubborn to die - I'm sure Grimaldus is proud of his brethren).

Helbrecht promoting some of his swordbrethren to marshals is also great, as it is the perfect tie in for a your dudes Primaris army.
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




Rihgu wrote:
Voss wrote:
Uphold the Honour of the Emperor
- All models have a 5+ invul save.
- Unmodified wound rolls of 1 and 2 against you always fail.
- You never receive the benefits of light cover

Any cover, not just light.
Its a ridiculously good vow, but you do lose out on benefiting from the -1 to hit from dense cover.


You don't need the benefits of cover to get the -1 to hit from dense cover.


Huh.
That's... probably true.
GW's rules writing drives me up the bend.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

Got my box set today, I was a bit surprised to find that the sprues kinda filled up the space in the box - they definitely could have put more in there, but it wasn't as empty as I would have thought considering the low model count of the box.

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in au
Slaanesh Chosen Marine Riding a Fiend




Australia

Rihgu wrote:
Voss wrote:
Uphold the Honour of the Emperor
- All models have a 5+ invul save.
- Unmodified wound rolls of 1 and 2 against you always fail.
- You never receive the benefits of light cover

Any cover, not just light.
Its a ridiculously good vow, but you do lose out on benefiting from the -1 to hit from dense cover.


You don't need the benefits of cover to get the -1 to hit from dense cover.


That is incorrect. See page 360 of the rulebook, the rare rules section:

If a rule says that the target unit 'does not receive the benefit of cover', without specifying what benefits are ignored, then, when resolving an attack with that rule, models in the target unit ignore all benefits received from all terrain traits, including those that improve its saving throws, impose penalties on hit rolls and so on. Note that rules that say that the target unit 'does not receive the benefit of cover' do not enable a model or weapon with that rule to target a unit that would not normally be visible due to terrain features with the Obscuring trait.


edit: got page number wrong, corrected

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/13 23:28:05


The Circle of Iniquity
The Fourth Seal
(HN) wrote:
It's an objectively mediocre book from the rule, lore, edition, content, hobby point of view.
 
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





Sigh. We need a 10th edition purely so that the people writing the AoS rules can write the rulebook. Why define the "benefits of cover" as something besides the most obvious meaning of the term if that definition is irrelevant to the majority of times you use the term "benefits of cover"?
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Do you really want that rule that limits unit size in AoS ported over to 40k?

The game already has an MSU issue now that GW decided that a "horde" is anything with 6 or more models. That rule would worsen it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/14 00:24:43


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





United States

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Do you really want that rule that limits unit size in AoS ported over to 40k?

The game already has an MSU issue now that GW decided that a "horde" is anything with 6 or more models. That rule would worsen it.



That rule was desperately needed in AoS. Way too many armies were breaking the balance of the game by min/maxing unit sizes. It's not needed in 40K, so it's unlikely that they would bring it over.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/14 00:31:25


 
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Do you really want that rule that limits unit size in AoS ported over to 40k?

The game already has an MSU issue now that GW decided that a "horde" is anything with 6 or more models. That rule would worsen it.



I didn't say to change the rules. Just to write them in a way that makes sense - that you can follow. None of this "a unit is receiving the benefits of cover when they're within 3" of an obstacle or in area terrain. By the way we use this 2 times in heavy and light cover, every single other place you see anything about receiving the benefits of cover means something completely different. have fun!"

Also, I don't mind that rule in AoS. Oh no, I went from being able to take units of 40 zombies to units of 60 zombies, but only 2 of them. The horror! My Kharadron Overlords whomst never reinforce a unit!! no! My Gloomspite Gitz opponent still places 120 goblins + 40 squigs on the table, just in slightly different configurations than before.

It hasn't been a horrible rule, in any case.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Rihgu wrote:
Also, I don't mind that rule in AoS. Oh no, I went from being able to take units of 40 zombies to units of 60 zombies, but only 2 of them. The horror! My Kharadron Overlords whomst never reinforce a unit!! no! My Gloomspite Gitz opponent still places 120 goblins + 40 squigs on the table, just in slightly different configurations than before.

It hasn't been a horrible rule, in any case.
In AoS, sure, but many units in 40k start at size 5 (some even lower). Porting this rule over to 40k as it exists now would mean that you'd be limited in how many full Marine squads one could take - one of the core building blocks on the game.

This is what I fear whenever I see someone say that they should bring the rules from one game across to another.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





United States

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Also, I don't mind that rule in AoS. Oh no, I went from being able to take units of 40 zombies to units of 60 zombies, but only 2 of them. The horror! My Kharadron Overlords whomst never reinforce a unit!! no! My Gloomspite Gitz opponent still places 120 goblins + 40 squigs on the table, just in slightly different configurations than before.

It hasn't been a horrible rule, in any case.
In AoS, sure, but many units in 40k start at size 5 (some even lower). Porting this rule over to 40k as it exists now would mean that you'd be limited in how many full Marine squads one could take - one of the core building blocks on the game.

This is what I fear whenever I see someone say that they should bring the rules from one game across to another.


I understand, but again. It was a needed rule in AoS. It isn't needed in 40K so I don't think they would bring it over.
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




Tacoma, WA, USA

If anything, 40K needs the opposite, a rule forcing you to take larger than minimum units.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 alextroy wrote:
If anything, 40K needs the opposite, a rule forcing you to take larger than minimum units.
Get rid of the 6 or more crap in 9th, and that might take care of itself (somewhat). No coherency nonsense with units 6-10 in size, no extra-horde mechanics. Don't punish people for taking standard sized squads, basically. Make it so the horde rules apply to actual hordes*.

And if compulsory Troops choices had to be max size, then that might help there as well. No more 3x3 Rippers and other nonsense (of course that would also be solved by making it so Rippers can't be compulsory choices, which in turn could be codified by making it so all Swarms can't be compulsory, which in turn is the reason why USRs are a good thing, and on and on we go down the rabbit hole... ).



*I am fully cognisant of the fact that any number chosen as the break point between "not a horde" and "horde" will always be arbitrary, be it 10+ or 12+ or 15+ or whatever. I just think that, perhaps, the standard size of squad for so many armies (10) should not be considered a horde (even a small one) and that 6-10 is FAR too low a threshold.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/14 04:51:17


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
If anything, 40K needs the opposite, a rule forcing you to take larger than minimum units.
Get rid of the 6 or more crap in 9th, and that might take care of itself (somewhat). No coherency nonsense with units 6-10 in size, no extra-horde mechanics. Don't punish people for taking standard sized squads, basically. Make it so the horde rules apply to actual hordes*.

And if compulsory Troops choices had to be max size, then that might help there as well. No more 3x3 Rippers and other nonsense (of course that would also be solved by making it so Rippers can't be compulsory choices, which in turn could be codified by making it so all Swarms can't be compulsory, which in turn is the reason why USRs are a good thing, and on and on we go down the rabbit hole... ).



*I am fully cognisant of the fact that any number chosen as the break point between "not a horde" and "horde" will always be arbitrary, be it 10+ or 12+ or 15+ or whatever. I just think that, perhaps, the standard size of squad for so many armies (10) should not be considered a horde and that 6-10 is FAR too low a threshold.


True. Not having psychology rules that punish you more for having larger units would also help. (And also more elite multi-wound units lose more for each failure, as multiple wounds just vanish into the ether each time)
20 man crusader squads are hilarious from this perspective, though at least you can nominate the scouts to despawn.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

That's a separate issue with the previous-described "lose more" system that GW calls "morale", a system that has nothing to do with actual morale (or suppression/pinning troops, as it should do) and more with giving players another avenue to cause even more damage to their opponent, but in a method that bypasses all the game's standard methods of causing damage (toughness, saving throws, wounds and damage).

Weirdly though, it's the 6-10 horde thing that I'd change first about 40k given the chance, not the bogus Morale rules.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut



Bamberg / Erlangen

I was excited this morning to see more posts in this thread until I saw that we are talking about AoS now.

Imperial Guard Space Marines
 
   
Made in us
Power-Hungry Cultist of Tzeentch





a_typical_hero wrote:
I was excited this morning to see more posts in this thread until I saw that we are talking about AoS now.


I feel you on that.
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





United States

Why did they keep the FB Crusader squad, but remove the FB Sword Brethren Squad? I spent a good 5 minutes trying to figure out why there were no plasma cannons on the crusader sprue only to realize their are two different profiles.

I really wish they would just squat the FB stuff and be done with it.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Togusa wrote:
Why did they keep the FB Crusader squad, but remove the FB Sword Brethren Squad? I spent a good 5 minutes trying to figure out why there were no plasma cannons on the crusader sprue only to realize their are two different profiles.

I really wish they would just squat the FB stuff and be done with it.


Aren't FB sword brethren just Vanguard Veterans?
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran






Togusa wrote:
Why did they keep the FB Crusader squad, but remove the FB Sword Brethren Squad? I spent a good 5 minutes trying to figure out why there were no plasma cannons on the crusader sprue only to realize their are two different profiles.

I really wish they would just squat the FB stuff and be done with it.


A. Slow FB squat

B. FB SB were Finecast and they are discontinuing that slowly as well

C. Forces old models off the current scene, thus forcing old players to buy their latest models instead of using old ones

D. Cuts out the 2nd hand market option for the unit, temporarily increasing their sales from meta chasers.

E. They no longer have to support the old unit with balanced rules and can move them to Legends for a slow death so they can claim the moral high ground of still technically supporting them for the current edition.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/17 03:36:23


 
   
Made in au
Slaanesh Chosen Marine Riding a Fiend




Australia

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Togusa wrote:
Why did they keep the FB Crusader squad, but remove the FB Sword Brethren Squad? I spent a good 5 minutes trying to figure out why there were no plasma cannons on the crusader sprue only to realize their are two different profiles.

I really wish they would just squat the FB stuff and be done with it.


Aren't FB sword brethren just Vanguard Veterans?


This. Firstborn Sword Brethren can easily be represented using the VV datasheet, while Firstborn Crusaders cannot. That's why.

The Circle of Iniquity
The Fourth Seal
(HN) wrote:
It's an objectively mediocre book from the rule, lore, edition, content, hobby point of view.
 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





United States

 Marshal Loss wrote:
 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Togusa wrote:
Why did they keep the FB Crusader squad, but remove the FB Sword Brethren Squad? I spent a good 5 minutes trying to figure out why there were no plasma cannons on the crusader sprue only to realize their are two different profiles.

I really wish they would just squat the FB stuff and be done with it.


Aren't FB sword brethren just Vanguard Veterans?


This. Firstborn Sword Brethren can easily be represented using the VV datasheet, while Firstborn Crusaders cannot. That's why.


Well that at least makes a little sense. But man, this book is so light. They didn't even make data sheets for Castellans or Marshalls, instead they just added wargear to the "captain" and "Lieutenant" vanilla codex. There are literally 6 data sheets in this book. Three characters(Helbrecht, Grimm and the Champion), Crusaders (FB and Primaris) and Sword Brethren. I will say the editing was much better in this book than what was in my Salamanders Supplement.

The models are unbelievably gorgeous though. Overall I'm pretty happy with the box set. In talking with a friend, for any who have the book there is a picture on page 42 that is of what will be this factions Combat Patrol box. This is confirmed because the Ork and Sisters boxes matched the ones on the same combat patrol pages in their books. For those without the book, it's 5 Intercessors, a Marshall, 10 Crusaders and an impulsor. When paired with the starter set it should make for a pretty decent force for those who aren't in the competitive spirit. The rules in the book seem good, at first glance everything looks playable. I'm pretty impressed with that, usually I would expect there to be some broken AF stratagem or something like that.

Overall I'm giving the product a solid 7/10.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/17 08:02:51


 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps






Togusa wrote:
Well that at least makes a little sense. But man, this book is so light. They didn't even make data sheets for Castellans or Marshalls, instead they just added wargear to the "captain" and "Lieutenant" vanilla codex. There are literally 6 data sheets in this book. Three characters(Helbrecht, Grimm and the Champion), Crusaders (FB and Primaris) and Sword Brethren. I will say the editing was much better in this book than what was in my Salamanders Supplement.

Honestly that makes sense, given how loaded the SM core book already is. It's not really like they need many more units.
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





United States

 Albertorius wrote:
Togusa wrote:
Well that at least makes a little sense. But man, this book is so light. They didn't even make data sheets for Castellans or Marshalls, instead they just added wargear to the "captain" and "Lieutenant" vanilla codex. There are literally 6 data sheets in this book. Three characters(Helbrecht, Grimm and the Champion), Crusaders (FB and Primaris) and Sword Brethren. I will say the editing was much better in this book than what was in my Salamanders Supplement.

Honestly that makes sense, given how loaded the SM core book already is. It's not really like they need many more units.


Yeah, I was just expecting they'd have data sheets in this book. As it is, rules wise it could have (and should have) been a free PDF.
   
Made in au
Slaanesh Chosen Marine Riding a Fiend




Australia

Spoiler:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Voss wrote:
Uphold the Honour of the Emperor
- All models have a 5+ invul save.
- Unmodified wound rolls of 1 and 2 against you always fail.
- You never receive the benefits of light cover

Any cover, not just light.
Its a ridiculously good vow, but you do lose out on benefiting from the -1 to hit from dense cover.


You don't need the benefits of cover to get the -1 to hit from dense cover.


That is incorrect. See page 360 of the rulebook, the rare rules section:

If a rule says that the target unit 'does not receive the benefit of cover', without specifying what benefits are ignored, then, when resolving an attack with that rule, models in the target unit ignore all benefits received from all terrain traits, including those that improve its saving throws, impose penalties on hit rolls and so on. Note that rules that say that the target unit 'does not receive the benefit of cover' do not enable a model or weapon with that rule to target a unit that would not normally be visible due to terrain features with the Obscuring trait.


edit: got page number wrong, corrected



Just want to correct myself because I was evidently wrong: Uphold the Honour of the Emperor does not affect dense cover due to a passage in the BT supplement:

Spoiler:

The Circle of Iniquity
The Fourth Seal
(HN) wrote:
It's an objectively mediocre book from the rule, lore, edition, content, hobby point of view.
 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





United States

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Spoiler:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Voss wrote:
Uphold the Honour of the Emperor
- All models have a 5+ invul save.
- Unmodified wound rolls of 1 and 2 against you always fail.
- You never receive the benefits of light cover

Any cover, not just light.
Its a ridiculously good vow, but you do lose out on benefiting from the -1 to hit from dense cover.


You don't need the benefits of cover to get the -1 to hit from dense cover.


That is incorrect. See page 360 of the rulebook, the rare rules section:

If a rule says that the target unit 'does not receive the benefit of cover', without specifying what benefits are ignored, then, when resolving an attack with that rule, models in the target unit ignore all benefits received from all terrain traits, including those that improve its saving throws, impose penalties on hit rolls and so on. Note that rules that say that the target unit 'does not receive the benefit of cover' do not enable a model or weapon with that rule to target a unit that would not normally be visible due to terrain features with the Obscuring trait.


edit: got page number wrong, corrected



Just want to correct myself because I was evidently wrong: Uphold the Honour of the Emperor does not affect dense cover due to a passage in the BT supplement:

Spoiler:


Question, what is written in the actual supplement does not specify light or dense cover. It only says "Each time an enemy model makes an attack against this unit, this unit does not receive the benefits of cover against that attack."
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

So what units can't the BTs take?

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





United States

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So what units can't the BTs take?


I see no restrictions at all in the codex. If it is in the vanilla codex and isn't tied to another chapter (i.e. characters) then you can have it.

*Edit* Baring psykers of course...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/17 10:46:23


 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







I think the core SM book precludes them from taking LIBRARIAN units, but that's about it. Given the two variants of Crusader Squads, I'm a little surprised they don't lose access to Tactical Squads, Scout Squads, Intercessors and Assault Intercessors.

Also, Togusa, you are familiar with what a Codex Supplement is, right?

2021 Plog - Here we go again... - my fifth attempt at a Dakka PLOG

My [url=https://pileofpotential.com/dysartes]Pile of Potential[/url - updates ongoing...

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.


 Kanluwen wrote:
This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.

Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army... 
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: