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, I am hoping the Black Templars get something to help them get into close combat. I love them, but I have a shooting army in the Tau and I most likely won't spend the cash trying to make my Templars a worse shooter version. If they really do have as many close combat issues as it seems we are hearing, I will stick with Tau until a Black Templars supplement comes out and they get another chance to fix them.

A run reroll or boosts to only challenges is nothing compared to what we lose by getting rolled into the codex. And a one time use set of USRs from a SC still don't justify his point cost, especially after a point increase. Not a homebrew, and still plan on sticking to generics. I know we don't know everything yet, so here's to hoping Templars have some surprises left for us.

so BTs got sort of worse at cc because first they lost re roll to hits in 6th then with this new book they lost rage

i can understand everyone's argument "hey they can now use all of the space marines stuff" but there is no buff to CC which is what they are supposed to be good at.

being good in challenges does not help with the flow of the battle. i will agree making things cheaper is cool and all but it still does not make us better at cc than most armies.

we still aren't even as good as CSM, BA, DA, SW, or half the other dexs that aren't supposed to be that good at cc and do it better than BT.

i understand they have focused this edition more towards shooty armies but why even put BT in the dex if its going to be worthless to even take the option.

i might as well try and convert all of my marines CC marines to shooty marines or just get into a new dex all together

all im saying is it wouldn't have broken the game if they have just given BT a special banner like DA or just ONE USR that would have made the army some what of a competitive army with a CC element

Are we even sure these guys have the book? Maybe we should ask them to show us a picture of the cover.

Lucarikx

 quickfuze wrote:
I love all the complaining in this thread.... as a Chaos SM player (I know I know you all hate when we comment but listen) I actually like the concept behind this codex design. Sure the new units are weird (effectiveness of new tanks and Centurions to be seen - btw I HATE the centurion model). However, I wish this was the direction our Codex had went....at least with the new C:SM when you play a chapter you will feel as if your playing THAT chapter. Not like our codex where every army feels the same and is just painted different.

I see where you are coming from, but I believe that's what the supplements are for which we are ALSO getting. So, over time hopefully CSM gets more individualism via the supplements.

Great post! Thanks for bringing the Q & A! I'm stoked and collecting more LOTD!

 NickTheButcher wrote:
So far the overall Codex rumors all seem to be a bit disappointing to me.

-Point reductions were good sounding at first, but now that we have to pay more for wargear it's almost pointless on almost every unit that had the reduction.

-No changes or irrelevant changes made to units that really needed them (Dreadnoughts, Assault Marines, Scouts, Vehicle Survivability etc..)

-Point increases on TH/SS Terminators. Seriously...why? Now I have to pay MORE to watch them die against Tau and Eldar.

-The new AA tanks seem pointless, as taking Stormtalons/Ravens and Flakk missiles will be more efficient.

-Grav weapons, seem decent albeit situational.

-Centurions -- I'm not sure on this until I play them. I think they will be better than people think. So there's some hope there.

-People wanting to play their ACTUAL army seem to be getting nerfed as well. Ultras getting multiple SC's and others getting 1 seems a bit odd in a Codex that was toted as being C:SM and not C:Ultramarines. Hopefully there's saving grace in the CT's that help with this. I'm hopeful that the 40k radio podcast on the 1st will shine a better light on this.

-No new SC's

These are all on top of chapter specific nerfs (Poor White Scars :/ ). Salamanders get to re-roll failed armor saves against flame weapons !?!? That's awesome, except I haven't actually been hit by a normal flamer since 5th -- now I just get murdered by Hellturkeys and D-Scythes

Excuse me while I go dry my tears

My thought exactly.
But hey, LotD got a 5p discount, this means that some one somewhere might actually take them once

Centurions make me think of a SM-Turducken

 NickTheButcher wrote:
Don't know that I agree. Scouts -- maybe But, really the 3 more points per model for +1 WS +1 BS and 3+ save makes normal Tac marines a better option unless I'm filling a niche option where Telion is involved. I'll have to see how they play out in the new dex, but Tac marines still seem like the lesser of 2 evils.

Scouts are good because they have Infiltrate and Scouts and can hence outflank. I run 10 Scouts with bolters in the old Codex and have found them very effective. Often, players have a rear objective guarded only by a small unit like a Combat Squad or small unit of Fire Warriors, Guardsmen, etc. Scouts can easily overrun and secure these sorts of objectives. The points reduction and LSS dedicated transport makes them even better. Are Scouts going to be the core of the army? No. But they got cheaper and better at performing the specialist role they're already good at. It sounds like Scout Bikers did too.

 NickTheButcher wrote:
IMO assault marines still appear to be overcosted for what you will get, and they still can't take any melta. However, CT's sound like it will influence that (Hello Ravenguard allies! ).

Assault Marines are good even without Combat Tactics, as indicated by Codex: Dark Angels-- a unit with two flamers and a combi-flamer in a Drop Pod is very cheap and very effective.

 NickTheButcher wrote:
This part of the post was mainly directed at Dreads not getting any attention at all. Again, certain chapter tactics may make them more valuable, but as it stands, they are a part of my army that never get used currently.

I've actually found Dreadnoughts to be very effective in 6th Edition, and am looking forward to adding It Will Not Die to mine!

 NickTheButcher wrote:
For me, it's all hinges on how they are used against infantry. If all they can do is shoot at flyers, than there are far more efficient units to take over them. If I can shoot at infantry, then yeah....that will be epic and I'll certainly field them.

Skyfire isn't even that much of a downside these days for a unit like this one. A lot of people forget that Skyfire applies to Skimmers as well as Flyers-- so all those Necron, Eldar, and Tau vehicles we've been seeing are valid targets as well.

 NickTheButcher wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:
I love all the complaining in this thread.... as a Chaos SM player (I know I know you all hate when we comment but listen) I actually like the concept behind this codex design. Sure the new units are weird (effectiveness of new tanks and Centurions to be seen - btw I HATE the centurion model). However, I wish this was the direction our Codex had went....at least with the new C:SM when you play a chapter you will feel as if your playing THAT chapter. Not like our codex where every army feels the same and is just painted different.

I see where you are coming from, but I believe that's what the supplements are for which we are ALSO getting. So, over time hopefully CSM gets more individualism via the supplements.

Like the BL supplement that just came out. Everything got more expensive for no gain. Oooo how unique! No wonder abby always fails.

 Exergy wrote:

 NickTheButcher wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:
I love all the complaining in this thread.... as a Chaos SM player (I know I know you all hate when we comment but listen) I actually like the concept behind this codex design. Sure the new units are weird (effectiveness of new tanks and Centurions to be seen - btw I HATE the centurion model). However, I wish this was the direction our Codex had went....at least with the new C:SM when you play a chapter you will feel as if your playing THAT chapter. Not like our codex where every army feels the same and is just painted different.

I see where you are coming from, but I believe that's what the supplements are for which we are ALSO getting. So, over time hopefully CSM gets more individualism via the supplements.

Like the BL supplement that just came out. Everything got more expensive for no gain. Oooo how unique! No wonder abby always fails.

Never said it was good -- that wasn't what the conversation was about. It was about being able to field a fluffy army with rules befitting that chapter/legion.

 NickTheButcher wrote:
So far the overall Codex rumors all seem to be a bit disappointing to me.

-Point reductions were good sounding at first, but now that we have to pay more for wargear it's almost pointless on almost every unit that had the reduction.
While the prices for many units ends up about the same, the lower base but higher upgrade costs do allow for more flexability when building units/lists.
-No changes or irrelevant changes made to units that really needed them (Dreadnoughts, Assault Marines, Scouts, Vehicle Survivability etc..)
Dreadnoughts and Vehicle survivability are honestly issues with the Walker/vehicle core rules, not something a single codex could really change. And Scouts and assault marines are cheaper, and have various chapter tactics that support them now.
-Point increases on TH/SS Terminators. Seriously...why? Now I have to pay MORE to watch them die against Tau and Eldar.
Because they needed an increase to balance them against TLLC terminators and tactical, which no-one generally takes anymore. and the increase is marginal, compared to what Space Wolves pay for THSS, and it's consistent with what BA and DA pay for theirs. It's not a surprise.
-The new AA tanks seem pointless, as taking Stormtalons/Ravens and Flakk missiles will be more efficient.
Not pointless, but not the deathdealers to fliers that some people demand. People ask for more and more powerful skyfire/interceptor weapons to deal with certain problem fliers, but anything that can deal with those problem fliers "efficiently" will wipe the skies clear of the more balanced fliers, making people stop taking any of the more balanced fliers. Though some players would cheer if noone took any fliers. And was pointed out, there are quite a few skimmers around to shoot at as well.
-Grav weapons, seem decent albeit situational.
Good. "Situational" is better than "strictly better" for promoting variety in lists.
-Centurions -- I'm not sure on this until I play them. I think they will be better than people think. So there's some hope there.
True, they are more tools for an army than face-crushers that some people want.
-People wanting to play their ACTUAL army seem to be getting nerfed as well. Ultras getting multiple SC's and others getting 1 seems a bit odd in a Codex that was toted as being C:SM and not C:Ultramarines. Hopefully there's saving grace in the CT's that help with this. I'm hopeful that the 40k radio podcast on the 1st will shine a better light on this.
It depends. SCs linked to chapter traits is not a bad thing to me, though some characters should not have been made Ultramarines to begin with- Telion and Chronus should have belonged to other chapters, but too late now.
-No new SC's
Iron Hands really could have used a SC, and it would have been nice to see some more SCs for other chapters, maybe bringing some old ones back like Chaplain Xavier. But the book already had 11Scs, and is gaining 3 more from the Templars getting rolled in.
These are all on top of chapter specific nerfs (Poor White Scars :/ ). Salamanders get to re-roll failed armor saves against flame weapons !?!? That's awesome, except I haven't actually been hit by a normal flamer since 5th -- now I just get murdered by Hellturkeys and D-Scythes
White Scars went from Outflank on all units to Scout on bikes and dedicated transports (which grants outflank as well. Trading a 12" scout move for outflank on foot units seems fair to me. And true, you can't get as many bikes as troops as you want anymore, that is a hit, but Khan is much cheaper and stronger now, and now chapter masters on bikes unlock bike troops, not just captains.
Excuse me while I go dry my tears

Responses in red.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 NickTheButcher wrote:
So far the overall Codex rumors all seem to be a bit disappointing to me.

-Point reductions were good sounding at first, but now that we have to pay more for wargear it's almost pointless on almost every unit that had the reduction.
While the prices for many units ends up about the same, the lower base but higher upgrade costs do allow for more flexability when building units/lists.
-No changes or irrelevant changes made to units that really needed them (Dreadnoughts, Assault Marines, Scouts, Vehicle Survivability etc..)
Dreadnoughts and Vehicle survivability are honestly issues with the Walker/vehicle core rules, not something a single codex could really change. And Scouts and assault marines are cheaper, and have various chapter tactics that support them now.
-Point increases on TH/SS Terminators. Seriously...why? Now I have to pay MORE to watch them die against Tau and Eldar.
Because they needed an increase to balance them against TLLC terminators and tactical, which no-one generally takes anymore. and the increase is marginal, compared to what Space Wolves pay for THSS, and it's consistent with what BA and DA pay for theirs. It's not a surprise.
-The new AA tanks seem pointless, as taking Stormtalons/Ravens and Flakk missiles will be more efficient.
Not pointless, but not the deathdealers to fliers that some people demand. People ask for more and more powerful skyfire/interceptor weapons to deal with certain problem fliers, but anything that can deal with those problem fliers "efficiently" will wipe the skies clear of the more balanced fliers, making people stop taking any of the more balanced fliers. Though some players would cheer if noone took any fliers. And was pointed out, there are quite a few skimmers around to shoot at as well.
-Grav weapons, seem decent albeit situational.
Good. "Situational" is better than "strictly better" for promoting variety in lists.
-Centurions -- I'm not sure on this until I play them. I think they will be better than people think. So there's some hope there.
True, they are more tools for an army than face-crushers that some people want.
-People wanting to play their ACTUAL army seem to be getting nerfed as well. Ultras getting multiple SC's and others getting 1 seems a bit odd in a Codex that was toted as being C:SM and not C:Ultramarines. Hopefully there's saving grace in the CT's that help with this. I'm hopeful that the 40k radio podcast on the 1st will shine a better light on this.
It depends. SCs linked to chapter traits is not a bad thing to me, though some characters should not have been made Ultramarines to begin with- Telion and Chronus should have belonged to other chapters, but too late now.
-No new SC's
Iron Hands really could have used a SC, and it would have been nice to see some more SCs for other chapters, maybe bringing some old ones back like Chaplain Xavier. But the book already had 11Scs, and is gaining 3 more from the Templars getting rolled in.
These are all on top of chapter specific nerfs (Poor White Scars :/ ). Salamanders get to re-roll failed armor saves against flame weapons !?!? That's awesome, except I haven't actually been hit by a normal flamer since 5th -- now I just get murdered by Hellturkeys and D-Scythes
White Scars went from Outflank on all units to Scout on bikes and dedicated transports (which grants outflank as well. Trading a 12" scout move for outflank on foot units seems fair to me. And true, you can't get as many bikes as troops as you want anymore, that is a hit, but Khan is much cheaper and stronger now, and now chapter masters on bikes unlock bike troops, not just captains.
Excuse me while I go dry my tears

Responses in red.

Stop being as smart as your avatar. It makes things less fun.

Seriously.

Cut it out.

(But, really, the only thing I had a problem with is bikes - with the White Scars traits, they seem to be as good as standard Ravenwing bikers for cheaper - can't really complain about that)

 shasolenzabi wrote:
Centurions make me think of a SM-Turducken

Turducken Slammers... and Turducken Blammers. Mmm, tasty. Off to Biggerson's!

Brother Weasel wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
Again, not abouthe rules. Its a principle. I've not worked for generics. I've worked for SCs. I expect SC. Like at a restaurant, you order a steak, pay for steak, expect a steak. Someone hands you a roast beef sandwich you have a problem.

appes to oranges... you care about the "special" part if it, but they are your own... they are only special if you can use them in certain combinations as named people? bs, if you don't care about the rules factor then there is nothing, NOTHING diffrent between kantor and bob the chapter master, except the mini, that you converted...

Pretty much what he said. The special thing about the special characters are their special rules. If you don't care about the rules, there's just simply no problem left. The fluff and the models are still there and can still be used with generic entries. But it's obvious that despite statements to the contrary, clearly the rules are the issue here.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I think it should have been obvious to anyone that fluff will trump fairness in this edition back when we saw the allies chart.

Eh? Quite possibly the biggest problem with the allies chart is that it DOESN'T represent fluff properly. It's why I was slightly bummed when the rumors said BT keeps their own ally table, as I was hoping to get around the whole BT & SoB allies table ridiculousness. It looks like I'll only really be able to use the SoB (once I get them - the ally table issue is the biggest reason I haven't so far) allies effectively with my CF, instead. Or for small games possibly with IG (who for me are also designed for use as allies rather than the main force).

It's been discussed before, but the BT/SoB relationship on the ally chart is actually the way it should be.

Lazy writers in the past latched on to the "Religious Zealots who hate Psykers" bit and figured "Oh, hai, they'd be bestest allies rite?"

But the problem is, the Black Templars and Ecclesiarchy actually believe in entirely different things. And if there's one thing that fanatical religious zealots have always been throughout history, it's readily accepting of different religious beliefs.

After all, it's not like Protestants and Catholics ever fought one another over ridiculously small differences. Or Sunnis and Shiites. Nope. Always bestest buds.

The reality is that the Black Templars run a ridiculously illegal military, anywhere from five to ten times their authorized strength. The Sisters of Battle preach a preposterous faith that the Black Templars know is wrong, and, to boot, are the galaxy's notorious busybodies and often extensions of the Inquisition. Why the heck would the Black Templars want them around?

Out of all the Space Marine Chapters, the Black Templars would be the least likely to ally with the Sisters.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
It's been discussed before, but the BT/SoB relationship on the ally chart is actually the way it should be.

Lazy writers in the past latched on to the "Religious Zealots who hate Psykers" bit and figured "Oh, hai, they'd be bestest allies rite?"

But the problem is, the Black Templars and Ecclesiarchy actually believe in entirely different things. And if there's one thing that fanatical religious zealots have always been throughout history, it's readily accepting of different religious beliefs.

After all, it's not like Protestants and Catholics ever fought one another over ridiculously small differences. Or Sunnis and Shiites. Nope. Always bestest buds.

The reality is that the Black Templars run a ridiculously illegal military, anywhere from five to ten times their authorized strength. The Sisters of Battle preach a preposterous faith that the Black Templars know is wrong, and, to boot, are the galaxy's notorious busybodies and often extensions of the Inquisition. Why the heck would the Black Templars want them around?

Out of all the Space Marine Chapters, the Black Templars would be the least likely to ally with the Sisters.

ALL of the Space Marines believe in entirely different things from the Ecclesiarchy. The point of the contention with the allies chart being what it is is that at the end of the day they're both still Imperials. The way the allies chart currently is, the Black Templars would rather ally with ALIENS (Tau, Eldar) and an army of PSYKERS (Grey Knights) then they would with the Sisters of Battle.

That is moronic, and there is zero fluff to support such an idiotic allies matrix. ALL Imperial armies should be, at the very worst, allies of convenience, while the xenos and chaos armies be Desperate Allies or Come the Apocalypse. That's the only set-up that makes sense.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
It's been discussed before, but the BT/SoB relationship on the ally chart is actually the way it should be.

Lazy writers in the past latched on to the "Religious Zealots who hate Psykers" bit and figured "Oh, hai, they'd be bestest allies rite?"

But the problem is, the Black Templars and Ecclesiarchy actually believe in entirely different things. And if there's one thing that fanatical religious zealots have always been throughout history, it's readily accepting of different religious beliefs.

After all, it's not like Protestants and Catholics ever fought one another over ridiculously small differences. Or Sunnis and Shiites. Nope. Always bestest buds.

The reality is that the Black Templars run a ridiculously illegal military, anywhere from five to ten times their authorized strength. The Sisters of Battle preach a preposterous faith that the Black Templars know is wrong, and, to boot, are the galaxy's notorious busybodies and often extensions of the Inquisition. Why the heck would the Black Templars want them around?

Out of all the Space Marine Chapters, the Black Templars would be the least likely to ally with the Sisters.

ALL of the Space Marines believe in entirely different things from the Ecclesiarchy. The point of the contention with the allies chart being what it is is that at the end of the day they're both still Imperials. The way the allies chart currently is, the Black Templars would rather ally with ALIENS (Tau, Eldar) and an army of PSYKERS (Grey Knights) then they would with the Sisters of Battle.

That is moronic, and there is zero fluff to support such an idiotic allies matrix. ALL Imperial armies should be, at the very worst, allies of convenience, while the xenos and chaos armies be Desperate Allies or Come the Apocalypse. That's the only set-up that makes sense.

Stop making too much sense!

Muh..muh balance...

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
It's been discussed before, but the BT/SoB relationship on the ally chart is actually the way it should be.
Lazy writers in the past latched on to the "Religious Zealots who hate Psykers" bit and figured "Oh, hai, they'd be bestest allies rite?"
But the problem is, the Black Templars and Ecclesiarchy actually believe in entirely different things. And if there's one thing that fanatical religious zealots have always been throughout history, it's readily accepting of different religious beliefs.
After all, it's not like Protestants and Catholics ever fought one another over ridiculously small differences. Or Sunnis and Shiites. Nope. Always bestest buds.
The reality is that the Black Templars run a ridiculously illegal military, anywhere from five to ten times their authorized strength. The Sisters of Battle preach a preposterous faith that the Black Templars know is wrong, and, to boot, are the galaxy's notorious busybodies and often extensions of the Inquisition. Why the heck would the Black Templars want them around?
Out of all the Space Marine Chapters, the Black Templars would be the least likely to ally with the Sisters.

ALL of the Space Marines believe in entirely different things from the Ecclesiarchy. The point of the contention with the allies chart being what it is is that at the end of the day they're both still Imperials. The way the allies chart currently is, the Black Templars would rather ally with ALIENS (Tau, Eldar) and an army of PSYKERS (Grey Knights) then they would with the Sisters of Battle.
That is moronic, and there is zero fluff to support such an idiotic allies matrix. ALL Imperial armies should be, at the very worst, allies of convenience, while the xenos and chaos armies be Desperate Allies or Come the Apocalypse. That's the only set-up that makes sense.

As BlaxicanX said. It's not lazy writing, and even if it is... it's out there, and making the allies chart contrary to all existing inter-BT/SoB fluff is frankly slowed. Just because different kinds of religious fanatics don't get along in the real world, doesn't mean they can't in 40k when there are "worse offenders" out there to act as a common foe. Especially in the heat of battle, which is where all 40k games take place. Obviously. And even while the Imperium/Ecclesiarchy "officially" holds the Emperor as a God, it's not like the BT are crusading against them, are they? Nor are the other loyalist marines.

SoB & BT might not be the best of pals (nor were Excoriators and SoB in the novel "Legion of the Damned", for example), but that's what the "Allies of Convenience" level of allying is for. And the "as it should be" for being "Desperate Allies" makes little sense when indeed compared to Tau and Eldar. I mean, seriously? It's like they just started determining BT ally levels with a D6 all of a sudden. THAT'S lazy.

Frankly I'm thinking of just house-ruling the allies chart in terms of SoB & BT in our local games. I mean it's not like I didn't play a 2vs2 with necrons on my side just two weeks ago, and so forth. And given BT is so similar to C:SM now, there's hardly any balance issues or whatever to consider either. As much as I've avoided asking for house rules so far, I think I've had enough of this particular stupid limitation.

The Grey Knights have always been specifically excluded from the hatred of the Templars. Maybe it's assumed the Grey Knights have better things to do than worry about what the Black Templars are doing. And there are all kinds of legitimate arguments that the Black Templars should hate Eldar and Tau too. I won't disagree with that. Maybe the thinking is that at least you know the Tau aren't going to tattle on you for having a couple thousand more Space Marines hanging around than you're supposed to. Besides, the Black Templars are the galaxy's biggest hypocrits anyway. With a massive chapter fleet and multiple crusades tromping around the galaxy requiring all sorts of Astropaths and Navigators, they employ more psykers than any other chapter than perhaps the Ultramarines (just based on the fact that the Ultramarines have hundreds of regiments of guard quality PDF ad assumedly a navy to match).

"Abhor the witch.

Okay, unless we really need them. Or they are Grey Knights. Those guys seem legit."

But really, the difference between the Templars and the rest of the Space Marines comes in their level of devotion. These guys start speaking in tongues and having seizures like Pentacostals. And the guy who flips out the best gets a huge sword and some sweet armor. They're a bit off their rockers. Won't use cover, and apparently up until now were totally opposed to the idea of having fire support units like Devastators, Thunderfires, or Whirlwinds. Logic and reason are not the domain of the Black Templar. They are the Doritos of Space Marines. Crunch all you want. We'll make more.

The rest of the Space Marines just look at the Ecclesiarchy like "Well, that's kinda dumb, but it keeps the sheep in line so we don't have to. As long as they don't bother us, they're serving a purpose and the Imperium."

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Besides, the Black Templars are the galaxy's biggest hypocrits anyway.

You forgot about the Space Wolves.

Turducken Slammers... and Turducken Blammers. Mmm, tasty. Off to Biggerson's!

Heh! fighting monsters will build up a big appetite!

Chrysis wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Besides, the Black Templars are the galaxy's biggest hypocrits anyway.

You forgot about the Space Wolves.

The Space Wolves are a whole different animal (). I've got problems with the ridiculousness of the Space Wolves fluff, given that they get to ignore the rules of Space Marines any time it makes them cooler. "Space Marines can't get drunk. Their blood is super filtered." "Oh yeah? Well Space Wolves invented super booze to get drunk on." "Space Marines have to be recruited at a young age because they have to start organ implementation before the onset of puberty." "Oh yeah? Well Space Wolves can be recruited in their teens so they can bang chicks before being Space Marines." "Space Marines are heavily indoctrinated warriors with little to no personality and spend their entire lives preparing for, and going to, war." "Oh yeah? Well Space Wolves are fookin' Space Vikings! How ya'all losers like them apples?" "Space Marines have short cropped hair and shave their faces so they can properly seal their helmets without worrying about compromising the eviro-seals." "Oh yeah? Pony tails and beards all around!"

So yeah, the Space Wolves are another breed of ridicusilly entirely. But I don't really see where they are hypocrits. What do you refer to?

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
"Abhor the witch.

Okay, unless we really need them. Or they are Grey Knights. Those guys seem legit."

Abhor the witch, destroy the witch - unless he's kinda mandatory in getting to places where there are other witches to burn, in which case only abhor, but do not destroy. GK? Grey area (pun unintended), who the heck knows. Plus if you're to believe the GK codex, the BT wouldn't even know the GK exist, so go figure.

 tvih wrote:
Abhor the witch, destroy the witch - unless he's kinda mandatory in getting to places where there are other witches to burn, in which case only abhor, but do not destroy. GK? Grey area (pun unintended), who the heck knows. Plus if you're to believe the GK codex, the BT wouldn't even know the GK exist, so go figure.

I always like that, I just have the mental image of a Black Templar constantly grinding his molars on his BattleBarge because there is a psyker piloting it and he can't go in and smoosh it.

...or maybe no one has actually told the Black Templars what that the Navigators actually do in their little bubbles.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

Chrysis wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Besides, the Black Templars are the galaxy's biggest hypocrits anyway.

You forgot about the Space Wolves.

The Space Wolves are a whole different animal (). I've got problems with the ridiculousness of the Space Wolves fluff, given that they get to ignore the rules of Space Marines any time it makes them cooler. "Space Marines can't get drunk. Their blood is super filtered." "Oh yeah? Well Space Wolves invented super booze to get drunk on." "Space Marines have to be recruited at a young age because they have to start organ implementation before the onset of puberty." "Oh yeah? Well Space Wolves can be recruited in their teens so they can bang chicks before being Space Marines." "Space Marines are heavily indoctrinated warriors with little to no personality and spend their entire lives preparing for, and going to, war." "Oh yeah? Well Space Wolves are fookin' Space Vikings! How ya'all losers like them apples?" "Space Marines have short cropped hair and shave their faces so they can properly seal their helmets without worrying about compromising the eviro-seals." "Oh yeah? Pony tails and beards all around!"

So yeah, the Space Wolves are another breed of ridicusilly entirely. But I don't really see where they are hypocrits. What do you refer to?

Their hatred of Witchcraft, despite fielding more Psykers than any other chapter. It's more expounded on in the Heresy Novels, where they kick and scream about how awful psykers are and then get upset when people point at their Rune Priests. "No, no. They aren't Psykers. That is all natural, from the earth and stuff. Nothing wrong with that."

I'm not blaming them for it. Even an illegal army has to be able to talk to one another and get from place to place.

I'm just saying that perhaps the reports of their hatred of psykers have been greatly exaggerated. After all, another thing that religious fanatics have shown no shortage of is hypocrisy. Say one thing, do another.

Now that I mention that, I actually kinda like the idea of the Black Templars as a being led by a bunch of hypocritical wackos preaching a hatred of deviants and mutants and aliens and psykers, while secretly their highest commanders will consistently choose to compromise those beliefs if it furthers their agenda. I mean, after all, they will grudgingly ally with xenos and psykers, but wouldn't want those crazy broads with the fire hanging around to rat them out if they do.

Seems just about the right amount of Grimdark.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

Chrysis wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Besides, the Black Templars are the galaxy's biggest hypocrits anyway.

You forgot about the Space Wolves.

So yeah, the Space Wolves are another breed of ridicusilly entirely. But I don't really see where they are hypocrits. What do you refer to?

I think he means the zealot aproach against the 1000 Sons use of psychic powers, while the Space Wolves runepriests are just Psykers with a different name.

Eh, that was ten thousand years ago. Live in the now. Why you gotta bring up old stuff?

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Eh, that was ten thousand years ago. Live in the now. Why you gotta bring up old stuff?

Because secretly Space Wolves have Dwarf genes and they hold grudges a long time

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Eh, that was ten thousand years ago. Live in the now. Why you gotta bring up old stuff?

Because it's not that it's ten thousand years ago, it's that they've been doing it for ten thousand years

zearas wrote:


i can understand everyone's argument "hey they can now use all of the space marines stuff" but there is no buff to CC which is what they are supposed to be good at.

No its not, BT are supposed to be a horde marine army with some sprinkled in good close combat. Wolves are better in close in the fluff, along with GK and Chaos. But Perform close combat, but the schtick is and has been overwhelming crusade, not elite band of ninjas.