Black Templars Nerfed?

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.

**The Crusader**

Sorry, Computer went all Derpy.

**Stormtrooper520**

^ LOL.

**Movac**

Bad post, kind of a waste of time responding but o well.

juraigamer wrote:Getting rage instead is amazing, don't listen to the fools.

+2 attacks means your lack of having sargents means you get double normal attacks that you used to get on those special weapons.

IF YOU GET THE CHARGE Please do some high school level stats before you say something is amazing. Against competent CC fighters, not being satisfied with smashing Guardsmen and Firewarriors as I'm sure you do whilst stroking your neckbeard, the reroll on the 4+'s at all times is much better than just the 1 extra attack you won't always get vs good players[/b]

Furthermore the standard setup for players that actually knew how to play BT didn't involve the need for more than 2 blobs, and they normally put 2 chaplins in each unit, solving the other problem of rolling to hit that you currently have. Adding in some vindicators and tank hunting terminators with cyclones and BT were and still are amazing. Of course the vindicators can be swapped out for something else if need be.

20 man hobo squads were more fun than effective, they crumbled vs any other competent CC unit and could take a pathetically long time to to kill another ws4 t4 ar 3 unit. Run 2 Chaplains eh? So now I'm running 3 HQs, which is a big sunk cost. AGAIN, LITANIES OF DERP IS ONLY ON THE CHARGE.

Their speeders are amazing, and tank hunting venerables with TL lascannons can solve your flying problems easily.

BT still shoot well compared to other marines, they definitely shot better than CC back in 5e considering GK, BA, and SW all passed them in CC capability during that time. In 5e, the only BT CC unit that was at all viable and feared were the Sword Brethren Assault Terminators. They packed PE, a mix of 2/3 attack LCs and TH/SSs, and FC. I admit that a unit with these traits combined with the new power of terminator armour in CC would probably be too powerful, but they were hit exceptionally hard by the changes to the traits that made them strong. They have become unplayable as a CC army for the time being, but the new codex will probably change that.

**Ma55ter_fett**

Movac wrote:Bad post, kind of a waste of time responding but o well.

juraigamer wrote:Getting rage instead is amazing, don't listen to the fools.

+2 attacks means your lack of having sargents means you get double normal attacks that you used to get on those special weapons.

IF YOU GET THE CHARGE Please do some high school level stats before you say something is amazing. Against competent CC fighters, not being satisfied with smashing Guardsmen and Firewarriors as I'm sure you do whilst stroking your neckbeard, the reroll on the 4+'s at all times is much better than just the 1 extra attack you won't always get vs good players

juraigamer wrote:Furthermore the standard setup for players that actually knew how to play BT didn't involve the need for more than 2 blobs, and they normally put 2 chaplins in each unit, solving the other problem of rolling to hit that you currently have. Adding in some vindicators and tank hunting terminators with cyclones and BT were and still are amazing. Of course the vindicators can be swapped out for something else if need be.

20 man hobo squads were more fun than effective, they crumbled vs any other competent CC unit and could take a pathetically long to to kill another ws4 t4 a 3 unit. Run 2 Chaplains eh? So now I'm running 3 HQs, which is a big sunk cost. AGAIN, LITANIES OF DERP IS ONLY ON THE CHARGE.

juraigamer wrote:Their speeders are amazing, and tank hunting venerables with TL lascannons can solve your flying problems easily.

BT still shoot well compared to other marines, they definitely shot better than CC back in 5e considering GK, BA, and SW all passed them in CC capability during that time. In 5e, the only BT CC unit that was at all viable and feared were the Sword Brethren Assault Terminators. They packed PE, a mix of 2/3 attack LCs and TH/SSs, and FC. I admit that a unit with these traits combined with the new power of terminator armour in CC would probably be too powerful, but they were hit exceptionally hard by the changes to the traits that made them strong. They have become unplayable as a CC army for the time being, but the new codex will probably change that.

I agree with your assessment.

also fixed your post

**Stormtrooper520**

Movac wrote:Bad post, kind of a waste of time responding but o well.

juraigamer wrote:Getting rage instead is amazing, don't listen to the fools.

+2 attacks means your lack of having sargents means you get double normal attacks that you used to get on those special weapons.

IF YOU GET THE CHARGE Please do some high school level stats before you say something is amazing. Against competent CC fighters, not being satisfied with smashing Guardsmen and Firewarriors as I'm sure you do whilst stroking your neckbeard, the reroll on the 4+'s at all times is much better than just the 1 extra attack you won't always get vs good players

Furthermore the standard setup for players that actually knew how to play BT didn't involve the need for more than 2 blobs, and they normally put 2 chaplins in each unit, solving the other problem of rolling to hit that you currently have. Adding in some vindicators and tank hunting terminators with cyclones and BT were and still are amazing. Of course the vindicators can be swapped out for something else if need be.

20 man hobo squads were more fun than effective, they crumbled vs any other competent CC unit and could take a pathetically long to to kill another ws4 t4 a 3 unit. Run 2 Chaplains eh? So now I'm running 3 HQs, which is a big sunk cost. AGAIN, LITANIES OF DERP IS ONLY ON THE CHARGE.

Their speeders are amazing, and tank hunting venerables with TL lascannons can solve your flying problems easily.

BT still shoot well compared to other marines, they definitely shot better than CC back in 5e considering GK, BA, and SW all passed them in CC capability during that time. In 5e, the only BT CC unit that was at all viable and feared were the Sword Brethren Assault Terminators. They packed PE, a mix of 2/3 attack LCs and TH/SSs, and FC. I admit that a unit with these traits combined with the new power of terminator armour in CC would probably be too powerful, but they were hit exceptionally hard by the changes to the traits that made them strong. They have become unplayable as a CC army for the time being, but the new codex will probably change that.

I am still going to play Black Templars as a CC army. Making them shooty really doesn't work for me. I love the fluff so much about them in close combat that I will still charge headlong into anything regardless. I am going to play them as my primary army for now. I still have some faith in them.

**Stormtrooper520**

Since we have rage now, would it be a good idea to have a Techmarine with servo-harness and duel lightning claws? Attach him to some squad and he can be a beast.

I'm not trying to think of ways to use rage to it's fullest potential.

Thoughts?

**Mannahnin**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Also, the hell GW, why did you feel like you needed to revert Land Speeder Typhoons to only firing S5 small blasts? That's like one of three good units in the Codex and they had to kill it. AAARGH!

Where the heck are you getting this? It's not in the BT FAQ. It's not in the rulebook. I cannot understand how anyone could hear such a rumor and repeat it without taking the very basic and simple and obvious step of checking those two places to find out that it's untrue.

**Stormtrooper520**

Mannahnin wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:Also, the hell GW, why did you feel like you needed to revert Land Speeder Typhoons to only firing S5 small blasts? That's like one of three good units in the Codex and they had to kill it. AAARGH!

Where the heck are you getting this? It's not in the BT FAQ. It's not in the rulebook. I cannot understand how anyone could hear such a rumor and repeat it without taking the very basic and simple and obvious step of checking those two places to find out that it's untrue.

Land Speeders stay the same, I don't know where people get this from. It's good GW didn't get rid of that.

**Marshall Ragnar**

Where does it say that about the Typhoon Lanchers? Ive looked everywhere and dont see where they changed it. The FAQ still says hvy2 missile lancher......

**Mannahnin**

Movac wrote:
Panzerboy26 wrote:When the Black Templar codex was first written, all preferred enemy DID was allow you to hit your opponent on 3's regardless of WS. When they changed it to 're-roll misses all the time every time', Black Templars got an UNGODLY army-wide buff with that vow.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that changing, and I honestly think that even Rage is a little TOO good as things stand.

Hmm, I guess "UNGODLY" means 2nd to last in placement at Ard Boyz and Nova, I didn't see Adepticon results.

14th place in the team tournament was the high placing for BT at Adepticon. Nick Rose won both Feast of Blades and Da Boyz GT with them last year. Dave Fay went top 10 with them at both KingdomCon and Comikaze last year. They're an old book that still has a few NASTY tricks and advantages. The tricks you can pull with Righteous Zeal can blindside people very badly.

**Stormtrooper520**

Mannahnin wrote:
Movac wrote:
Panzerboy26 wrote:When the Black Templar codex was first written, all preferred enemy DID was allow you to hit your opponent on 3's regardless of WS. When they changed it to 're-roll misses all the time every time', Black Templars got an UNGODLY army-wide buff with that vow.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that changing, and I honestly think that even Rage is a little TOO good as things stand.

Hmm, I guess "UNGODLY" means 2nd to last in placement at Ard Boyz and Nova, I didn't see Adepticon results.

14th place in the team tournament was the high placing for BT at Adepticon. Nick Rose won both Feast of Blades and Da Boyz GT with them last year. Dave Fay went top 10 with them at both KingdomCon and Comikaze last year. They're an old book that still has a few NASTY tricks and advantages. The tricks you can pull with Righteous Zeal can blindside people very badly.

Tournaments are bad example of an armies worth. Thats all the player.

**Mannahnin**

The codex has to provide the tools, then the player has to use them. If someone is arguing that a given book can't compete in the big leagues, one or two examples of it doing so disprove the blanket assertion.

They don't prove much on a broader scale, but they do show that it's possible.

**SalamanderMarine**

On the whole Black templars rolled into the marine codex it is possible and maybe a sign as mentioned in the rulebook every army has its own section but templars are with normal marines, I hope they don't get rid of the book as I love my templars, maybe at least they will give them special rules in the vanilla book at least.

**BTNeophyte**

Why would they roll us into the vanilla book if we're an army on the allies chart?

**Mannahnin**

Yeah, I don't see that happening. They'll undoubtedly get an awesome book within the next year or two.

**Stormtrooper520**

They won't roll us into vanilla marines because if you guys know, Black Templars don't follow the Codex Astartes. They have 5 to 10 thousand marines in their chapter. They also don't have scout companies, so they can not be rolled in with codex marines. ever.

**Mannahnin**

GW has changed fluff many times, and even without doing so, if they really wanted to, could easily write a new SM codex which would include rules allowing us to represent some or all of the various sub-chapters. If White Scars can be represented in the main book (as they are) they could certainly do the same to Dark Angels, Black Templars, Blood Angels, etc.

The reason they won't is because they make more money and can sell more marine figs selling a variety of SM books, each with a somewhat different play style and some unique interesting units.

**Stormtrooper520**

True true. I just think Templars will never be put into the vanilla space marines codex. I don't think they would make a move like that after all the years of BTs.

**monolythic**

My gut says they will roll us into the smurf book.... they'll make more money because the C:SM book is more expensive and they know we'll buy it if there is a special section in there for us. it'll happen that way, and like a lemming i'll get it. hate myself for that.

But I think Panzer brought up a good point about how we got a little OP when the PE rule changed and TH/SS got FAQ'd. FC termies with PE? that particular unit was kind OP and I won more than a few tournaments with people scratching their heads thinking about how LC termies were rerolling hits and wounds at init 5 for 45 pnts a model....

reason it feels like a nerf though is because the rest of the dex is so terrible by comparison to our marine cousins. BA can take a TLLC razor for 55 points and i'm paying 90+? we're an old dex and that's life. I think when they release the new dex (in whatever form it comes) we'll get a huge boost with updated special rules and new models that come with white hoods.

Were we viable in 5th but not an elite dex... still won a lot... but no one would would put us on the top shelf. (still better than those Dark Angel scrubs though!)

**Stormtrooper520**

monolythic wrote:My gut says they will roll us into the smurf book.... they'll make more money because the C:SM book is more expensive and they know we'll buy it if there is a special section in there for us. it'll happen that way, and like a lemming i'll get it. hate myself for that.

But I think Panzer brought up a good point about how we got a little OP when the PE rule changed and TH/SS got FAQ'd. FC termies with PE? that particular unit was kind OP and I won more than a few tournaments with people scratching their heads thinking about how LC termies were rerolling hits and wounds at init 5 for 45 pnts a model....

reason it feels like a nerf though is because the rest of the dex is so terrible by comparison to our marine cousins. BA can take a TLLC razor for 55 points and i'm paying 90+? we're an old dex and that's life. I think when they release the new dex (in whatever form it comes) we'll get a huge boost with updated special rules and new models that come with white hoods.

Were we viable in 5th but not an elite dex... still won a lot... but no one would would put us on the top shelf. (still better than those Dark Angel scrubs though!)

Maybe, I don't we will get put there, for the reasons that their have been black templar codex rumors for some time now. I know it just rumors, but templars are said to be updated in after Chaos Space Marines who are first. Templars are too popular to be put into vanilla marine codex. Dark Angels seem like that would. They are not that popular. But I know a good amount of people who play templars. I'll admit that preferred enemy for on assault terminators + furious charge was kind of op. But every army has a "deathstar" unit. That was them. I feel like when we get updated, we will get some good cc rules.

**juraigamer**

Cry me a river guys, if you can't get the charge you're playing BT wrong.

A list with 2 chappys, champion, 2 blobs of 20 troops, 2 units of 5 terminators with tank hunters and 2 cyclone missiles and 3 POTMS vindicators was, and still is, a balling 1850 point list (you have to peel off a few of the neophytes to add in weapons on the blobs)

Furthermore, the chaplins are there for one reason: to make your power blobs fearless, because failing a rightous zeal hurts bad, not noticing that makes it seem like you don't even know the army.

Now POTMS vindicators may not be the best for this edition, but changing the list is the players job. You can easily make a massive landspeeder list for BT that works very well, as can you put tons of excellent terminators on the table. As a tau player, I know one thing to be true when it comes to playing 40k, adapt or get left behind. Crying doesn't solve the problem.

**ZebioLizard2**

Templars are too popular to be put into vanilla marine codex. Dark Angels seem like that would. They are not that popular. But I know a good amount of people who play templars.

Dark Angels are actually far more popular than BT, BT as has been recorded through various services has been shown to be the least used/least liked of the current Marine lists.

**Stormtrooper520**

juraigamer wrote:Cry me a river guys, if you can't get the charge you're playing BT wrong.

A list with 2 chappys, champion, 2 blobs of 20 troops, 2 units of 5 terminators with tank hunters and 2 cyclone missiles and 3 POTMS vindicators was, and still is, a balling 1850 point list (you have to peel off a few of the neophytes to add in weapons on the blobs)

Furthermore, the chaplins are there for one reason: to make your power blobs fearless, because failing a rightous zeal hurts bad, not noticing that makes it seem like you don't even know the army.

Now POTMS vindicators may not be the best for this edition, but changing the list is the players job. You can easily make a massive landspeeder list for BT that works very well, as can you put tons of excellent terminators on the table. As a tau player, I know one thing to be true when it comes to playing 40k, adapt or get left behind. Crying doesn't solve the problem.

We aren't crying about it..thats a little rude. We are just discussing about if it was bad or good losing preferred enemy. We aren't insulting GW and acting like babies.

Btw the list you made isn't bad, but I prefer the mech lists, 2 Chaplain, Emperor's Champion, 3 squads of crusaders, 1 in a rhino, 1 in a land raider and 1 camping on an objective with a lascannon. Then land speeders and a assault terminator squad in a LRC, and the rest of that junk..

I've had bad experiences with lists like the one you posted.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Templars are too popular to be put into vanilla marine codex. Dark Angels seem like that would. They are not that popular. But I know a good amount of people who play templars.

Dark Angels are actually far more popular than BT, BT as has been recorded through various services has been shown to be the least used/least liked of the current Marine lists.

You sure about that? Least liked? what the

**fishy bob**

Stormtrooper520 wrote:Templars are one of the most devoted space marine chapters in all of Warhammer 40k. They are even described as beyond fanatical.

And there you have it. They're gonna end up with the Word Bearers.

**Stormtrooper520**

fishy bob wrote:
Stormtrooper520 wrote:Templars are one of the most devoted space marine chapters in all of Warhammer 40k. They are even described as beyond fanatical.

And there you have it. They're gonna end up with the Word Bearers.

Hahahaha!

**AlmightyWalrus**

Mannahnin wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:Also, the hell GW, why did you feel like you needed to revert Land Speeder Typhoons to only firing S5 small blasts? That's like one of three good units in the Codex and they had to kill it. AAARGH!

Where the heck are you getting this? It's not in the BT FAQ. It's not in the rulebook. I cannot understand how anyone could hear such a rumor and repeat it without taking the very basic and simple and obvious step of checking those two places to find out that it's untrue.

Exactly: It's not in the FAQ. I.e. we use the profile in our Codex, which is S5 AP5 Small Blast Twin-linked. I DID take the basic and simple and obvious step of looking in the FAQ; that part of the update isn't there anymore. The Cyclone Missile Launcher is still updated (thank the Emperor), but I can't see the Typhoon Multiple Missile Launcher anywhere in there.

J99Pwrangler wrote:
Plus if we still had preferred enemy, we would be a worse army then GK. re-rolls to shoot? you know how many typhoons, cyclone ML we would have rocking the board? then the Templars would be OP. Our Chaplin actually have power now, we have a use for them. With 5th ed ACC i never ran one, it didnt pay to. Plus our bikes, terminators, techmarines, typhoons are all great models that give us an advantage in this edition.

Templars had PE in CC, not all the time. There wouldn't be a problem.

**Mannahnin**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:Also, the hell GW, why did you feel like you needed to revert Land Speeder Typhoons to only firing S5 small blasts? That's like one of three good units in the Codex and they had to kill it. AAARGH!

Where the heck are you getting this? It's not in the BT FAQ. It's not in the rulebook. I cannot understand how anyone could hear such a rumor and repeat it without taking the very basic and simple and obvious step of checking those two places to find out that it's untrue.

Exactly: It's not in the FAQ. I.e. we use the profile in our Codex, which is S5 AP5 Small Blast Twin-linked. I DID take the basic and simple and obvious step of looking in the FAQ; that part of the update isn't there anymore. The Cyclone Missile Launcher is still updated (thank the Emperor), but I can't see the Typhoon Multiple Missile Launcher anywhere in there.

Doesn't this follow the clause under "Amendments" in the FAQ, so the weapon profile will be replaced by the one on page 416 of the rulebook?

I can understand the confusion now though, thanks.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Mannahnin wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:Also, the hell GW, why did you feel like you needed to revert Land Speeder Typhoons to only firing S5 small blasts? That's like one of three good units in the Codex and they had to kill it. AAARGH!

Where the heck are you getting this? It's not in the BT FAQ. It's not in the rulebook. I cannot understand how anyone could hear such a rumor and repeat it without taking the very basic and simple and obvious step of checking those two places to find out that it's untrue.

Exactly: It's not in the FAQ. I.e. we use the profile in our Codex, which is S5 AP5 Small Blast Twin-linked. I DID take the basic and simple and obvious step of looking in the FAQ; that part of the update isn't there anymore. The Cyclone Missile Launcher is still updated (thank the Emperor), but I can't see the Typhoon Multiple Missile Launcher anywhere in there.

Doesn't this follow the clause under "Amendments" in the FAQ, so the weapon profile will be replaced by the one on page 416 of the rulebook?

I can understand the confusion now though, thanks.

Black Templars FAQ/Errata wrote:"Note that this is an older Codex, written for a previous edition of the rules. You will therefore need to consult the Reference section of the Warhammer 40,000 for an up to date list Unit types and Vehicle Hull Points. You'll also find that some of the weapons in this Codex are written out longhand, rather than using the weapon profile format in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. Don't worry - these are functionally identical, unless noted otherwise in this document."

Emphasis not added but rather present in the original document.

As we can see, we're directed to the Reference section for Unit types and Vehicle Hull Points. We're also told to use the weapon profiles in the rulebook unless the FAQ/Errata says something else, as they're functionally identical to the ones in the Rulebook.

Conclusion: Templars once again use the old Typhoon Multiple Missile Launcher rules, which gives us yet another nerfed unit.

**Stormtrooper520**

Oh joy, there goes my love for land speeders...

**Marshall Ragnar**

I loved my speeders and always ran 6 of them! Guess i know have 420pts to spend on other stuff.....