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.

Well seems that the BT's have been removed from the GW site so could mean a few different things that they are either being rolled into the SM codex or getting a new book or gone all together.

 Void_walker wrote:
Well seems that the BT's have been removed from the GW site so could mean a few different things that they are either being rolled into the SM codex or getting a new book or gone all together.

They haven't been removed from GW site. Just put in the SM section.

*edit- Apologies. They have but their name is still in the SM section

 angelofvengeance wrote:

 Void_walker wrote:
Well seems that the BT's have been removed from the GW site so could mean a few different things that they are either being rolled into the SM codex or getting a new book or gone all together.

They haven't been removed from GW site. Just put in the SM section.

Even when you click on the pin the page is blank, theres no emperors champion, Helbrutch, or chapter upgrades, or sword brethren on the site.

Okay, that is strange.
But Black Templar don't get their own Codex in the foreseeable future.
At "best", they will become a subsection of the Space Marine Codex that is expected end of this or early next year.

Can still find the miniatures but they dont seem to be in any catagory:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1160023a

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1060199

 Kroothawk wrote:

But Black Templar don't get their own Codex in the foreseeable future.

Or do they?

*dramatic music*


I have to say that I agree with Kroot though. It's looking more and more as though we'll be rolled back. Oh well, I've had fun, let's see if they manage to make it good without fething it up.

Just checked UK GW site and they have disappeared there too. Not sure this means the Templars are next as it seems a bit soon to take them down (as this usually happens when they update the store for any preorders).

This is a blatant shift. Back to C:SM with you methinks.

I approve. Happy for BA, DA and SW to have their own Codexes as they were always the big 3. As a second founding chapter, Black Templars having their own Codex always looked out of place to me.

 Flashman wrote:
This is a blatant shift. Back to C:SM with you methinks.

I approve. Happy for BA, DA and SW to have their own Codexes as they were always the big 3. As a second founding chapter, Black Templars having their own Codex always looked out of place to me.

Newsflash: BA, DA and SW are also second founding Chapters, since there were no Chapters prior to that. The Black Templars, and every other Second Founding Chapter, played just as big a part as the "big 3", they just did it under a different name. It's not until the Third Founding we get to Chapters that didn't take part in the Herersy as part of the Legiones Astartes.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Flashman wrote:
This is a blatant shift. Back to C:SM with you methinks.

I approve. Happy for BA, DA and SW to have their own Codexes as they were always the big 3. As a second founding chapter, Black Templars having their own Codex always looked out of place to me.

Newsflash: BA, DA and SW are also second founding Chapters, since there were no Chapters prior to that. The Black Templars, and every other Second Founding Chapter, played just as big a part as the "big 3", they just did it under a different name. It's not until the Third Founding we get to Chapters that didn't take part in the Herersy as part of the Legiones Astartes.

OK, perhaps from the perspective of the current fluff. But having been into 40K since the late 1980s, Black Templars always seemed a bit tacked on. Just my opinion though.

Strange, but they don't usually start removing old stuff until very close to the new release: so unless Tau release is a massive April Fools prank (please please please let it be true), Black Templars are at minimum month away, and likely at least four months away.

My guess is they're reorganizing the site somewhat, maybe giving BT their own army slot like other "independent" Marine armies.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Flashman wrote:
This is a blatant shift. Back to C:SM with you methinks.

I approve. Happy for BA, DA and SW to have their own Codexes as they were always the big 3. As a second founding chapter, Black Templars having their own Codex always looked out of place to me.

Newsflash: BA, DA and SW are also second founding Chapters, since there were no Chapters prior to that. The Black Templars, and every other Second Founding Chapter, played just as big a part as the "big 3", they just did it under a different name. It's not until the Third Founding we get to Chapters that didn't take part in the Herersy as part of the Legiones Astartes.

Not to Burst your bubble but BA, DA and SW all had primarchs leading LEGIONS under those names. And while you are right BT's were part of the Imperial Fists they weren't a Legion just like the Crimson Fists they split off. So BA, DA and SW's ALL original Armies... BT not...they were second founding... just saying....

 Flashman wrote:
This is a blatant shift. Back to C:SM with you methinks.

I approve. Happy for BA, DA and SW to have their own Codexes as they were always the big 3. As a second founding chapter, Black Templars having their own Codex always looked out of place to me.

This^

completely agree, for a second founding chapter to get it's own codex has always seemed odd, all their special rules could be done on a 2 page spread in the new SM codex.

Without trying to sound like a jerk, I'd be just as happy to see one less Marine codex every cycle. Plenty of power armor going around already. BT would be fine as part of the main SM book.

Cool, one less SM book. Looking forward to having the rumored trait system back for C:SM

 newbis wrote:
Without trying to sound like a jerk, I'd be just as happy to see one less Marine codex every cycle. Plenty of power armor going around already. BT would be fine as part of the main SM book.

That would require signifant fluff shift, however. BT are very divergent from Codex Chapters, almost as much as Space Wolves.

If there is a Marine codex which should be merged to main book, it's Dark Angels.

Merge ALL the marine chapters into a huge book much larger the size of the other codexes

Charge a corresponding amount more for it

Re-issue with revisions only to the cover and appropriate sub section whenever you want to update a chapter

(listen to GW shareholders cheer, and players sob)

 uk_crow wrote:

 Flashman wrote:
This is a blatant shift. Back to C:SM with you methinks.

I approve. Happy for BA, DA and SW to have their own Codexes as they were always the big 3. As a second founding chapter, Black Templars having their own Codex always looked out of place to me.

This^

completely agree, for a second founding chapter to get it's own codex has always seemed odd, all their special rules could be done on a 2 page spread in the new SM codex.

Even tough I'm completely agreeing with BT being 2nd founding and stuff, they are a chapter that doesn't follow the Codex Astartes, thus their uniqueness (well not that unique but they are one of the few.). I think it is more than justified to give them their own codex simply because of their; completely different style of chapter organisation, Hatred against psykers (thus not having any), Their different type of warfare (that they work in crusades.) and their very different forms of command (which is also slightly what i said first here).

They aren't just a bit different, they are a whole lot different than "normal" chapters.

But this is just my opinion, whatever GW does is their thing and whatever you think about it i your thing, do note that I'm really not against the possibility that they will merge with the SM codex

 Lews Therin wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Flashman wrote:
This is a blatant shift. Back to C:SM with you methinks.

I approve. Happy for BA, DA and SW to have their own Codexes as they were always the big 3. As a second founding chapter, Black Templars having their own Codex always looked out of place to me.

Newsflash: BA, DA and SW are also second founding Chapters, since there were no Chapters prior to that. The Black Templars, and every other Second Founding Chapter, played just as big a part as the "big 3", they just did it under a different name. It's not until the Third Founding we get to Chapters that didn't take part in the Herersy as part of the Legiones Astartes.

Not to Burst your bubble but BA, DA and SW all had primarchs leading LEGIONS under those names. And while you are right BT's were part of the Imperial Fists they weren't a Legion just like the Crimson Fists they split off. So BA, DA and SW's ALL original Armies... BT not...they were second founding... just saying....

You completely missed my point. Crimson Fists and Black Templars are every bit as much "First Founding" as the Imperial Fists Chapter. The fact that there was a Legion with the name of one of them doesn't mean that the Imperial Fists Chapter can claim all the history of the Heresy as theirs and no one else's. The Legions no longer exist; the fact that some Chapters have the same names as the non-existant Legions doesn't matter.

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?

They are on the site under Space Marines...false alarm all.

Go to 40k -> Armies -> Space Marines -> Black Templar...right under Bitz

Its hard to see BT being merged into the Codex: Space Marines, their organisation doesn't follow codex astartes at all. I have never seen so many haters in this thread and in 40k general, they deserve a codex as much as Space Wolves, who are on par with the amount of differences BT have with codex astartes.
Also, they always have been under the Space Marines section, just like DA were until they got a new codex.

I'd rather see more IG armies like Tallarn and Catachan getting/retaining their own codex over More space marines. A lot more could be done there in variation. I also don't like this breaking up chaos as much as its been broken up (fantasy or 40k). Much too much.

Ive said it before, but Space Marines could easily be condensed into 3 books each with a couple different lists.

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
Also, they always have been under the Space Marines section, just like DA were until they got a new codex.

Yes they have, BUT before today they also had a normal splash screen intro. That means when ever you would click on the black templars there would be this screen describing the army (like every other army on the GW site has) and a button that said "view entire product list". That splash screen is now gone! So unlike every other army that GW sells, there is no description of the Templars any longer.

It has got to be because they are rolling it into the normal Marine Codex - and as a Black Templar player I'm actually glad. Means more frequent updates and more unit choices!

YakManDoo wrote:
They are on the site under Space Marines...false alarm all.

Go to 40k -> Armies -> Space Marines -> Black Templar...right under Bitz

Yes, they're back. Did they used to have their own section though?

 Gorlack wrote:

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
Also, they always have been under the Space Marines section, just like DA were until they got a new codex.

Yes they have, BUT before today they also had a normal splash screen intro. That means when ever you would click on the black templars there would be this screen describing the army (like every other army on the GW site has) and a button that said "view entire product list". That splash screen is now gone! So unlike every other army that GW sells, there is no description of the Templars any longer.

It has got to be because they are rolling it into the normal Marine Codex - and as a Black Templar player I'm actually glad. Means more frequent updates and more unit choices!

How long ago was that? Because for the last couple of years, I've never seen that, for BT or DA

Backfire wrote:

 newbis wrote:
Without trying to sound like a jerk, I'd be just as happy to see one less Marine codex every cycle. Plenty of power armor going around already. BT would be fine as part of the main SM book.

That would require signifant fluff shift, however. BT are very divergent from Codex Chapters, almost as much as Space Wolves.

If there is a Marine codex which should be merged to main book, it's Dark Angels.

Not at all; while BT -fluff- might mark them as extremely divergent, does their army? What about BT couldn't be achieved with a couple of special rules? If we are getting some analogue to the Traits system back, all you do is bring in the Emperor's Champion, allow the army to select a vow, allow Tacticals to swap Bolter for BP+CCW, and give players the option to merge their Scout and Tactical squads. Throw Helbrecht or Grimaldus(depending on if they update the Reclusiarch with Grimaldus-like abilities) into the SC section, and the rest is down to the player choosing fluffy units.

Now, I don't disagree about Dark Angels, hell, Blood Angels could be easily rolled back into C:SM the same way, but the plain fact of the matter is; you're the new kids, comparatively. BA and DA got their own separate 'dex during 2nd Edition, as did SW, while BT had to wait for the Armageddon campaign mini-list, and didn't get a full 'dex until 4th, so if anyone's getting rolled back into the main book it's going to be BT.

Hell, look at it this way; at least you're likely to feature prominently if it does happen, there are several Chapters with actual Legion names and iconography that are almost completely ignored in C:SM.

been saying it at my local store since the 6th ED book came out, "All armies that will have their own codices for 6th edition are featured in the 6th ED book. Since BT were rolled into the BRB Space Marine section then thats where they will stay until otherwise noted..."

I mean they're giving us the heads up, its just people keep wanting to read into things and see a conspiracy that isnt there... bunch a cold warriors IMO...

That said, I really hope this does not bump back Eldar... Farseers need to be back to kingship when it comes to psykers...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yodhrin wrote:

Hell, look at it this way; at least you're likely to feature prominently if it does happen, there are several Chapters with actual Legion names and iconography that are almost completely ignored in C:SM.

you mean like iron hands? lol

Before Dark Angels got their codex, they were just bland codex marines, because it was an old codex. Black Templars were, and are in the same position, but they still have way more divergence to C:SM.

Have Black Templars not been under the SM section for a while now?

They always have been.