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.

After the Fleshtearer incident, I don't the sisters will be allying with Blood Angles or their successors anytime soon.

Thats a good point about the Fleshtearers - although I think they would still ally with the Blood Angels themselves?

Mr Morden wrote:My main problem with all this is that the central part of your argument - " the Sisters aren't just as likely to ally with Black Templars as they are with Necrons, it's that the Sisters are less likely to ally with those two factions than they are with Grey Knights or other Space Marines"

There is nothng that I have seen in BL or the relevant Codexes that says this - in fact it is always the opposite - you can make up stuff to justify what seems to be a mistake by GW but that it is all there is - no basis in fluff / rules / background etc......... Yeah I am aware that people from the same basic faith can be bitter enemies but this is NOT what we haev in the BT and SOB - if there was a long history of beligerence between the two then hey that makes sense.

Your comparison with the Necrons and Blood Angels is so very flawed its untrue- these two forces were fighting EACH OTHER before the nids arrived - the Vinculus Crusade is an example of Imperial Forces acting TOGETher against a common threat. Totally different

However if you want to make up stuff to help justify the mistake thats up to you I guess.................

Yes the Necrons and Blood Angels were fighting each other. But then, the Tyranids showed up. The desperation of that situation is what made them temporary allies. The ally chart doesn't express any reasons. So the reasons why one set of factions might be desperate allies and why others might be desperate allies can be, and usually will be, entirely different because of the fact that each faction has its own motivations. That's why (once again, lol), the third category is so freaking broad. Since the only lower classification is "no alliances", it has to cover pretty much everything from "Holy crap we're about to die, maybe we should stop fighting and team up", all the way to "You smell funny, and we were kinda hoping you'd just leave, but we need to get this done so we might as well get to it."

As far as the Black Templars and Sisters go, there's no evidence they're best of friends, and there's no evidence that they are worst of enemies. The discussion is why are they Desperate Allies. We know that they are. It's right there on the chart. So, no matter what you want to believe, that's the case. So you can point to "But buts", however, in the end, the Templars and Sisters don't get along too well, and any incidents of them allying in the past are obviously the exceptions, and not the rule. There are plenty of examples of antagonistic factions working together for common, temporary goals. It doesn't mean they have to be permanent allies. Heck, maybe the fluff just changed. I mean, a few months ago, the Necrons were soulless murder machines and now they are Tomb Kings in space with personalities. However, you only really have two examples of Black Templars and Sisters being allies. It isn't like this is some kind of preponderance of evidence either way.

Sorry but that does not wash if the only things you have to support the Desperate Allies BT/SOB matrix is:

Its in the book - and GW does not mistakes?

The previous examples that are in the fluff should be ignored as "something may have changed in the fluff (its not in the rulebook if it has)

There is nothing to make the SOB/BT desperate Allies except this brand new chart - Which COULD (and should) be wrong. As you said yourself - the SM /Tau Battle Brothers is likely over the top for the fluff?

If there are two examples of them working together with no problem and NONE of them are not - why should this be ignored??

Yes most factions can and should work together in "desperate times but other factions should work together most of the time with no issues - BT and SOB are one. Again you have missed my point - the Necrons/ Blood Angels is exactly the right thing for Desperate Allies - the BT/SOB example is a perfect Allies of Convenience.

I don't really know why you aredefending this possible error?

Because I fully believe the error was ever writing the Sisters and Templars to be friendly in the first place. It makes absolutely no sense when looked at closer. The allies chart is what makes sense. Teaming up the two religious themed factions is just lazy writing, just like copy/pasting the twenty year old Apocrypha of Skaros/Davio fluff that lists 23 Ultramarines successors when the Grey Knights codex clearly says there were 400 Second Founding Chapters is lazy editing. But unless GW comes out and says "Oops, we're idiots and totally meant for that square to be yellow", it's hard to suggest the chart, which was specifically engineered for this edition of the game, was a mistake.

I mean, the chart's combos aren't the best in some cases. The Tau/SM thing I don't get. But the SoB/BT part of it makes sense.

If it based on just your own prefences rather than anything else GW has written than your stance makes more sense to me............

you say "When looked at closer" - but how do we do that excatly when there is limited background info and ALL that supports the friendly (or at the very least non hostile) nature of the relationship (as much as Astartes and mortals can be) - either you acknowedge and accept the fluff and the chart is wrong or you prefer to discard everything previously written about the two organisations in realtion to the matter in favour of what might just be the wrong colour being used in the chart?

You are also just saying In your own view its "lazy" rather than taking two similar organisations and saying they have similar views - thats not lazy thats logical surely based on their depiction in the Game world and the organsiations they are obviously based on from the real world. It all works.....

Lastly although GW taking any notice of this is not that esepcially likely but if we don;t talk about what we think is wrong then it certainly won't.

An updated chart would not be a big thing anyway..............

Mr Morden wrote:Thats a good point about the Fleshtearers - although I think they would still ally with the Blood Angels themselves?

That is a bit of a problem indeed. The same goes for Vanilla Marines. They incorporate so many different Chapters united under some umbrella ...
I think the same goes for the Imperial Guard as well, though the problem is "less obvious" there.

In the end, it'll be up to the player to decide what makes sense.

As for the SoB+BT, I think it's pretty easy. We already know the chart is a bit dumb in places. The Tau/SM thing has been given as just one example, so the precedent is there. We also know that there was a lot of cooperation between the BT and SoB in the past, including the SoB's immortalization on a Black Templar banner, the BT rescueing holy relics from a cathedral in Armageddon, and their leaders fighting side by side in a duel against a demon. On the other hand we have absolutely no mentioning of them not getting along well at all, so obviously any claims in this regard are simply personal preference. "Lazy writing" is just another way of saying "well I didn't like the official fluff so I made up my own".

Yes, sometimes this can indeed be better than what the studio has written. However, in the end you still just can't go out there and claim it as fact, as it remains what it is. A single gamer's personal opinion deviation from what the rest of us have read.

Mr Morden and Veteran Sergeant.. I think TBH you are both putting more thought into the meanings behind that chart, than the makers did themselves. And I am only half joking when I say that... Ward has proven time and time again that background is there to be broken, and he changed background at the behest of the Sales department in the direction of whichever directive they have passed on to him.

1st priority is either sales or game balance (depending on your level of cynicism), after that comes respect for the previous efforts of background writers.

Mr Morden wrote:If it based on just your own prefences rather than anything else GW has written than your stance makes more sense to me............

you say "When looked at closer" - but how do we do that excatly when there is limited background info and ALL that supports the friendly (or at the very least non hostile) nature of the relationship (as much as Astartes and mortals can be) - either you acknowedge and accept the fluff and the chart is wrong or you prefer to discard everything previously written about the two organisations in realtion to the matter in favour of what might just be the wrong colour being used in the chart?

You are also just saying In your own view its "lazy" rather than taking two similar organisations and saying they have similar views - thats not lazy thats logical surely based on their depiction in the Game world and the organsiations they are obviously based on from the real world. It all works.....

Unless you actually have any real inclination to look at the "religious views" of the Templars v. the Sororitas.

The Templars and Sororitas do not have the same religious views. There's not even really a similar portion of the view to give them common ground, outside of "The Emperor's pretty awesome".

@ Pacific
You could very well be right - still its no bad thing to point out apparent mistakes in case they actually just that

@Kanluwen

I did and I do - depending on if you consider BL novels like "Helsreach" Canon - some do and some don't, where its pretty obvious their religious views are indeed similar.

The BL fluff in particular increasingly has them as fully accepting the Emperors divinity and similar to the more mainstream Imperial Church. This builds on the Codex information about their Faith (from the very beginning) in the Emperor rather than view many Astartes have of him as a non divine figure.

It may be that the new HH novels are going to change this but given the way that the Cult of the Emperor is present in the HH - I see no reason why the BT formation in the 2nd Founding did not include the adherents of this Faith - which would make them natural allies of the Sisters?

If there are other soruces that do contradict these - be interested to read them (or be reminded of things I haev forgotten) - as I am just as likely to be wrong as right but I am basing my views on what I have read thus far.

Page/Books ref would be fine as I have the majority of what GW has produced since the original RT - thanks

Kanluwen wrote:The Templars and Sororitas do not have the same religious views. There's not even really a similar portion of the view to give them common ground, outside of "The Emperor's pretty awesome".

I don't see how that is supposed to be a problem. Universally (probably with exception to those few units sponsored by Astartes fiefs), Imperial Guard regiments revere the Emperor as a god like the Sisters do, yet the Black Templars are battle brothers with them? What about the other Marine Chapters who care even less for the Imperial Cult than the Black Templars do - given Chaplain Grimaldus' valiant rescue of Ecclesiarchal relics from the shattered Temple of the Emperor Ascendant on Armageddon, which the Black Templars had defended against the Orks? Did I miss the note where it says they have an issue with the Ecclesiarchy? Usually the books point this out.

"Desperate Alliance", as the book points out, is meant for forces that are prone to shooting each other every time they meet - forces which may be branded traitor for this sort of cooperation. Even if the BT would dislike the Sisters - to which I see no inclination in the fluff whatsoever - that would be covered by an Alliance of Convenience.

Mr Morden wrote:If it based on just your own prefences rather than anything else GW has written than your stance makes more sense to me............

you say "When looked at closer" - but how do we do that excatly when there is limited background info and ALL that supports the friendly (or at the very least non hostile) nature of the relationship (as much as Astartes and mortals can be) - either you acknowedge and accept the fluff and the chart is wrong or you prefer to discard everything previously written about the two organisations in realtion to the matter in favour of what might just be the wrong colour being used in the chart?

"ALL" is two examples, lol. One fluff tidbit about Black Templars joining forces with an Inquisitor (not with the Sisters. They just also happened to be allied with the Inquisitor) and a Canoness and Marshal being forced to join forces to defeat a daemon. The other is a picture of a banner, lol. We've also seen pictures that suggest Calgar has a tiny peanut head attached to Stretch Armstrongs body. /shrug. You'll have to pardon me if those aren't considered definitive evidence by any reasonable jury.

But, you say it yourself. "at the very least non hostile". That's what they are. Non-hostile. The Spess Marines have no reason to attack the Sisters most of the time. Even, let's allow, the vast majority of the time. And they probably do have a measure of respect for their abilities. That's acknowledging the fluff. Not whatever imaginary version you ascribe to. Past that, we have plenty of material that suggests an uneasy, even antagonistic relationship. The Space Marines don't believe in the God-Emperor. They don't trust the Inquisition. They don't trust the Ecclessiarchy. They don't like interference from other Imperial agencies, and don't consider themselves subject to Imperial decrees or laws. Why exactly does any of this suggest the Space Marines and Sisters should be friendly? Because you want them to be? I mean, that's fine. But it isn't exactly solid reasoning, lol.

You are also just saying In your own view its "lazy" rather than taking two similar organisations and saying they have similar views - thats not lazy thats logical surely based on their depiction in the Game world and the organsiations they are obviously based on from the real world. It all works.....

Absolutely wrong.

All of the official game fluff about Space Marines says that they reject the worship of the Emperor as a deity. All of it. And the Codex: Black Templars book very explicitly describes the Black Templars being very much the same as their brothers in their beliefs and attitudes towards the rest of the Imperium. Why would the heavier than usual Christian iconography and terminology suggest otherwise? We already know they are "crusaders" because they're still pretending to be on the Great Crusade from 10,000 years earlier. Not because they've embraced the Adeptus Ministorum's lies as truth. They know better. The Sisters don't, but they're utterly convinced they are right. Seems like a pretty drastic gulf right there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lynata wrote:I don't see how that is supposed to be a problem. Universally (probably with exception to those few units sponsored by Astartes fiefs), Imperial Guard regiments revere the Emperor as a god like the Sisters do, yet the Black Templars are battle brothers with them?

And, just like the Sisters, the Marines would hold them with a measure of disinterest and view them as misguided in their faith. But, the Imperial Guard rarely, if ever, unless already under the control of Inquisitorial agents, have any authority. Nor do the I Guard typically have any interest in policing Space Marines. They're glad to have the reinforcements, and the Space Marines are glad to have the cannon fodder and artillery. We went over the reasons why Space Marines ally with the Guard. You seek out allies with capabilities you don't[i] have. You don't need allies who can do what you can do. You just [i]do those things.

Surely, the Space Marines would probably be less enthusiastic allies of a Guard regiment from a Shrine world, and more enthusiastic to ally with the PDF from one of their homeworlds. The problem is, the Guard is a gigantic faction with countless variations. We know what Space Marines are. We know what Sisters of Battle are. Imperial Guard can be anything from crazed heretics under the sway of Chaos forces, to Space Mongols riding horses wielding exploding lances.

- given Chaplain Grimaldus' valiant rescue of Ecclesiarchal relics from the shattered Temple of the Emperor Ascendant on Armageddon,

Please let this one go. The story very clearly says the Black Templars went there because it was the most heavy concentration of Orks amongst the last three bastions of defense. The relics happened to be where the Orks were. The Black Templars did not go there to rescue Ecclessiarchal relics. He went there to fight Orks, and defending the temple's relics just happened to be a side effect since he was already there. At no point in that story is it even suggested that they chose the temple because it was anything other than strategically significant and a way to get crozius deep in some orks.

Sorry but you are the one reading into the Codex's what you want and distorting facts to fit how you want them to be - also why should you be at all concerend about the Tau/SM battle brothers - if we follow your reasonsing through - then that s the new reality - it does not matter about everything you know - its irrelevant - in fact why are you not defending this as a great step forward, that has in fact always been the case.

We may only cite a mere Two examples but sadly you can cite none at all - why are we then wrong and you are right?

Fluff titbits are the only thing GW tend to give you to go on. You keep distorting the Crusade - the Inquisitor used both groups together as his weapons and they worked perfectly together - nothing that would make them Desperate Allies - and thats the crux of the argument - I DONT argue that the SOB and BT should be anything more than Allies of Convenience which is actually what you also say -that they are "non hostile" forces working together. If they were Desperate allies they would be hostile but forced to work together - thanks for strenthening our argument even further

The other is the Banner - the picture is one element the other is the text with it - If there is fluff that contradicts these pieces thats fine - GW retcons all the time - but its not the case here and your wishing it so does not make it so.

"Past that, we have plenty of material that suggests an uneasy, even antagonistic relationship" - where is this "plenty of material" is that relates directly to the BT/SOB ? Page refs and book titles are fine - I am ready to admit I am wrong if you have anything to back it up with?

And even if the BT are just the same as the other Astartes - why does this make them a Desperate Ally rather than a Ally of Convinience like EVERY OTHER Chapter - your argument holds no water here I am afraid - again your statements just show how wrong the matrix is - thanks

The BT Codex does not say they don't worship the Emperor no more then it says they do but what it does say is that they are about FAITH, in Him and his vision of the Imperium - which is clearly what ADB saw as well when he wrote Helsreach - where they absolutely do worship Him and in fact are quick to call out Anyone who does not. Again if you don't accept BL novels as Canon then thats fair enough but if you do then sorry but you are just plain wrong. If you acknowldege the novel as a legitimate source - happy to quote the passages that confrim his Faith in the Emperor as a divine being and God?

Here is a great one - in response to the Princeps of a Imperator Titan talking about the Emperor as "your god"

"You stand on difficult ground, Zarha. I am a Chaplain of the Adeptus Astartes, sworn into my position with the grace of the Ecclesiarchy of Terra. In my presence, you have expressed the notion that the Emperor of Mankind is not your god, as He is for the entire glorious Imperium. Whilst I am not blind to the ...separatist elements within the Mechanicus, the fact remains that you are speaking heresy before a Reclusiarch of the Emperor's Chosen"

Nothing ambivilent here about his beliefs!?

re the Temple relics - again you miss the point of the story - its all to do with his Faith in the Emperor and him having failed Him - indeed one of is special rules in the Codex is - Only in Death does duty end says: "Such is his incredable fortitude and Faith in the Emperor (emphasis mine).......

Another example
p6 Sigismund had been choosen as the Emperor's champion for his fervant [b]Faith in the Emperor[/b

As I said before the HH novels have established that the Cult of the Emperor was sweeping the Imperium and that Astartes are not immune to this Faith.

back to the main point - WHY are the BT not Allies of Convenirence when every other Spacec Marine Chapter are - your arguments say that they should be, our arguments say they should be, fluff says they should be - what does not?

One matrix in a brand new book that may even be a error - as it has no basis in anything ever written before or even within the new rulebook.

I just found it odd that the space marines could consider Tau as battle brothers but hey what ever.

Agreed - Allies of Convinience makes sense - perhaps its a game balance thing rather than a fluff thing.

Sure its odd. The 'narrative' example in the later pages of the BYB shows the 2nd company of Ultramarines joining a fight between IG and traitor-marines, having Mr codex stuck in his sicarius returning from a anti-Tau campaign...and thats the only piece of fluff with marines and tau at the same page.

But there is more.

Necrons got the theme of: order unity obedience. Got to dislike Eldar orks and nids.
May ally with orks....CSM... sounds like order? like unity?
Tau got to save the Kroot from the greenskins and acknowlegded the orks as impossible to negotiate with...can ally with orks now.
Tau may not ally so well with demons , but with CSM...so pray tell, what is favorable about CSM to make it convenient opposed to desperate like with demons? What makes them allies at all? Naivety? Chaos stealing their xeno allies when they don't look?
Dark Angels, formerly known as xenophobic and not even getting along with abhuman IG, may now ally with xenos..

Veteran Sergeant wrote:All of the official game fluff about Space Marines says that they reject the worship of the Emperor as a deity. All of it.

Then obviously this isn't the reason the Black Templars stand apart, given that all other Marine Chapters count as "Allies of Convenience". And why does this extreme dislike that you seem to see not extend to the Cult Mechanicus?

Veteran Sergeant wrote:And the Codex: Black Templars book very explicitly describes the Black Templars being very much the same as their brothers in their beliefs and attitudes towards the rest of the Imperium.

Is that so? Because when *I* look at the Codex, it describes the Black Templars as having a pretty heavy religious undertone with things such as the "Armour of Faith" bestowed upon the Emperor's Champion as he is "anointed" by the Chaplains, and how they have "holy relics", or how they are "holy warriors" that "pray" to the Emperor and how they "convert masses with the sword to the Master of Mankind". These are actual quotes from their latest Codex.
That, as well as their disgust towards psykers, is the difference I see to other Marine Chapters, and it is my belief that it puts them closer to any member of the Imperial Cult. So if you think the studio books hint at any issues there ... quotes please. Not your personal opinion again.

On a sidenote, other interesting details would be that the Black Templars also address the Emperor with a capital "H" when they pray to "Him", or how they too receive the Rosarius from the Ecclesiarchy as a formal token of their links, and keep it in its original form. For comparison, the Ecclesiarchy does not hand it out to every Marine Chapter (the Iron Hands for example does not receive it), and the Space Wolves used to take it but then reshape it into the form of some animal totem.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:We already know they are "crusaders" because they're still pretending to be on the Great Crusade from 10,000 years earlier.

And upon checking the sources we will find out that the Black Templars had little to do with the Great Crusade, as they were a Second Founding Chapter. The Templars' Crusade is rooted in the Chapter's desire to prove its loyalty to the Emperor, as it is explained in the Codex. Furthermore, if it were otherwise, the Crimson Fists - their "Brother Chapter" - would display a similar behavior, yet they do not so it must have developed some time after their founding.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:We went over the reasons why Space Marines ally with the Guard. You seek out allies with capabilities you don't[i] have. You don't need allies who can do what you can do. You just [i]do those things.

You continue to underestimate the Sisters' capabilities and ignore their purges of Marine Chapters ("lazy writing" again, I presume?). Reinforcements are reinforcements, and unless there is some sort of a grudge - which is not even hinted at in the books - there is no reason not to take them. Regardless of certain players' personal opinions, as per GW's fluff the Black Templars "respect the Sisters' prowess and skill at arms".

Veteran Sergeant wrote:Please let this one go. The story very clearly says the Black Templars went there because it was the most heavy concentration of Orks amongst the last three bastions of defense. The relics happened to be where the Orks were. The Black Templars did not go there to rescue Ecclessiarchal relics.

Yet if he didn't care for them - as you suggest - he would not have shielded them from the rubble and saved them from destruction, carrying them to safety. So I see no reason to let this perfect example of the Black Templars' respect for the Imperial faith go.

To recap:
- you already admitted the chart is flawed in some places
- you also admitted the previous sources establishing a history of mutual cooperation (dismissed as "lazy writing" )
- you further lack any sort of evidence to the contrary (still no fluff quotes about any incidents or even bad blood between the BT and SoB/Ecclesiarchy)
--> conclusion: it remains a personal opinion that clashes with the established material

There really isn't anything to discuss, unless you manage to dig up some fluff that actually lends some solid basis to your claims.