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.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Accolade wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That isn't the army's fault as much as the edition's fault.

bs. BT got a bunch of rubbish rules and more or less nothing to support getting into melee, so they can't. That's the army's fault, not the edition. They could easily have gotten something to help them be faster than the measly buff Crusader provides (say, something like Righteous Zeal...), something to help neuter shooting or something to let them consolidate into combat once per turn, that they didn't isn't the fault of the edition, it's the fault of Codex: Space Marines, and it's (IMO) the root cause of why so many of us BT players are so upset. When we say it's "not BT" anymore it's because the army doesn't play anything near like what it used to (or, well, not if you want to have a chance of winning).
:

WIth rules like wounds taken from the front and overwatch I think that this edition's rules has a *lot* to do with the neutering of *everyone's* ability to assault, let alone BT.

Exactly. I haven't seen an army yet that has anything that really counters to the edition's rules to make their assault units better. And it's not like BT are the only ones who got spanked with the Nerf Paddle in that regards either: Khorne Berzerkers are on that list as well as Genestealers, Orks and more.

In the case of Khorne Berzerkers and Genestealers it STILL isn't somehow magically "the edition's fault". It's the fault of the Codices for not giving them some sort of loophole, whether that be Genestealers that are allowed to assault from outflanking or Berzerkers that can assault from any vehicle. Orks are fair enough, they haven't gotten a new Codex since 6th, so their problems are due to the edition changing, but the others are Codex failures.

WHY, for the love of God, should each army have to have a loophole to get around the rules in the main rulebook??? Why would it not make more sense to balance out the main rules so that assault has a fair opportunity to be effective?

All this does is clog up the game with more and more miscellaneous rules.

Player 1: "Okay, you're assaulting my Tau, I get to Overwatch."
Player 2: "No, my Templars have Knight Visage, they get to attack before you can Overwatch."
Player 2: "Oh, well then I guess I'll never get to overwatch again".

EDIT: I should clarify, I very much like the Templars. But I feel these suggestions just come across as special snowflake syndrome and ignore the greater systemic issues that 40k faces in terms of making assaulty armies competitive.

Worried about overwatch? Bring terminators!

 Accolade wrote:
WHY, for the love of God, should each army have to have a loophole to get around the rules in the main rulebook??? Why would it not make more sense to balance out the main rules so that assault has a fair opportunity to be effective?

All this does is clog up the game with more and more miscellaneous rules.

Because everyone wants their army to be the super special snowflake of skulldragging and when it isn't then it's "bad" and it "sucks" and it's "ruined forever".

My army is a super special snow flake because it's played by the most handsome man that plays 40k.

So there!

 kronk wrote:
My army is a super special snow flake because it's played by the most handsome man that plays 40k.

So there!

nobody likes you joker, also batman wants his city back kk thnx bye.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
WHY, for the love of God, should each army have to have a loophole to get around the rules in the main rulebook??? Why would it not make more sense to balance out the main rules so that assault has a fair opportunity to be effective?

All this does is clog up the game with more and more miscellaneous rules.

Because everyone wants their army to be the super special snowflake of skulldragging and when it isn't then it's "bad" and it "sucks" and it's "ruined forever".

You're right Clockwork, and man, it just kills me. Space Marine players seems so quick to discount their army as dead, unappreciated, and discarded. But they have ALL of the following:

PRIMARY CODEXS:
- Blood Angels
- Dark Angels
- Grey Knights (yes, they are essentialy just holy-er Space Marines)
- Main Codex Marines (which covers a bunch of the original legions)
- Space Wolves

SUPPLEMENTS:
- Clan Raukaan Iron Hands
- Sentinels of Terra Imperial Fists

All of this has to be updated, but people get upset if their particular faction doesn't get enough attention. And it seems like GW is trying to give attention to more chapters these days, perhaps they don't want to play favoritism for certain chapters. Meanwhile Sisters get a digital-only codex for their entire army and Orks are leftovers from the 4th edition, but somehow it's the BT I should feel sorry for.

Look, im not complaining. Im happy with what I have. Its just that from what Ive heard, Templars are no longer viewed favorably at GW. Im not saying that we need super special rules for assault or anything like that, I just wanted to know that my army is still viable, and will be for the next few editions. And as for sisters of battle, I have nothing but respect for those players. To show such dedication to an army that has been so abused... Its humbling!


Yeah, what really worried me was their absence from any recent novels or backround in 40k.

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
Look, im not complaining. Im happy with what I have. Its just that from what Ive heard, Templars are no longer viewed favorably at GW. Im not saying that we need super special rules for assault or anything like that, I just wanted to know that my army is still viable, and will be for the next few editions. And as for sisters of battle, I have nothing but respect for those players. To show such dedication to an army that has been so abused... Its humbling!


Yeah, what really worried me was their absence from any recent novels or backround in 40k.

They featured in the Necron codex, had a section in the SM codex all to themselves, and didn't they have one of the SM battle novels all to themselves (Helsreach)?

 Accolade wrote:


All of this has to be updated, but people get upset if their particular faction doesn't get enough attention. And it seems like GW is trying to give attention to more chapters these days, perhaps they don't want to play favoritism for certain chapters. Meanwhile Sisters get a digital-only codex for their entire army and Orks are leftovers from the 4th edition, but somehow it's the BT I should feel sorry for.

Digital dex or no, Sisters still play like they always has. Orks still haven't waited as long as BT had to in order to get a new Codex, and I'm not seeing anyone telling Orks to stop wanting better rules just because Tyranids, that other horde-centric Xenos Codex, got a new update. All those other Marine Chapter updates mean squat (pun intended) to someone who wants to play BT because they don't play the same. Sure, I could switch to playing some other Marine army (leading to a bunch of useless models just like for everyone else), but it wouldn't be the army I want to play, the army whose playstyle got me into the game in the first place.

Plus, the whole part where Sisters and Orks still have Codices, whereas BT don't.

 Accolade wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Accolade wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That isn't the army's fault as much as the edition's fault.

bs. BT got a bunch of rubbish rules and more or less nothing to support getting into melee, so they can't. That's the army's fault, not the edition. They could easily have gotten something to help them be faster than the measly buff Crusader provides (say, something like Righteous Zeal...), something to help neuter shooting or something to let them consolidate into combat once per turn, that they didn't isn't the fault of the edition, it's the fault of Codex: Space Marines, and it's (IMO) the root cause of why so many of us BT players are so upset. When we say it's "not BT" anymore it's because the army doesn't play anything near like what it used to (or, well, not if you want to have a chance of winning).
:

WIth rules like wounds taken from the front and overwatch I think that this edition's rules has a *lot* to do with the neutering of *everyone's* ability to assault, let alone BT.

Exactly. I haven't seen an army yet that has anything that really counters to the edition's rules to make their assault units better. And it's not like BT are the only ones who got spanked with the Nerf Paddle in that regards either: Khorne Berzerkers are on that list as well as Genestealers, Orks and more.

In the case of Khorne Berzerkers and Genestealers it STILL isn't somehow magically "the edition's fault". It's the fault of the Codices for not giving them some sort of loophole, whether that be Genestealers that are allowed to assault from outflanking or Berzerkers that can assault from any vehicle. Orks are fair enough, they haven't gotten a new Codex since 6th, so their problems are due to the edition changing, but the others are Codex failures.

WHY, for the love of God, should each army have to have a loophole to get around the rules in the main rulebook??? Why would it not make more sense to balance out the main rules so that assault has a fair opportunity to be effective?

All this does is clog up the game with more and more miscellaneous rules.

Player 1: "Okay, you're assaulting my Tau, I get to Overwatch."
Player 2: "No, my Templars have Knight Visage, they get to attack before you can Overwatch."
Player 2: "Oh, well then I guess I'll never get to overwatch again".

EDIT: I should clarify, I very much like the Templars. But I feel these suggestions just come across as special snowflake syndrome and ignore the greater systemic issues that 40k faces in terms of making assaulty armies competitive.

Ideally I'd agree with you, but when the rulebook's overly restrictive it's no good sitting around for an entire edition going "well shucks, them's the rules".

 Accolade wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
WHY, for the love of God, should each army have to have a loophole to get around the rules in the main rulebook??? Why would it not make more sense to balance out the main rules so that assault has a fair opportunity to be effective?

All this does is clog up the game with more and more miscellaneous rules.

Because everyone wants their army to be the super special snowflake of skulldragging and when it isn't then it's "bad" and it "sucks" and it's "ruined forever".

You're right Clockwork, and man, it just kills me. Space Marine players seems so quick to discount their army as dead, unappreciated, and discarded. But they have ALL of the following:

PRIMARY CODEXS:
- Blood Angels
- Dark Angels
- Grey Knights (yes, they are essentialy just holy-er Space Marines)
- Main Codex Marines (which covers a bunch of the original legions)
- Space Wolves

SUPPLEMENTS:
- Clan Raukaan Iron Hands
- Sentinels of Terra Imperial Fists

How many of those allow for the playstyle that was up until recently allowed by Codex: Black Templars? Plus, you're again assuming that I'm interested in playing "Space Marines, any variation" instead of "Black Templars".

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That isn't the army's fault as much as the edition's fault.

bs. BT got a bunch of rubbish rules and more or less nothing to support getting into melee, so they can't. That's the army's fault, not the edition. They could easily have gotten something to help them be faster than the measly buff Crusader provides (say, something like Righteous Zeal...), something to help neuter shooting or something to let them consolidate into combat once per turn, that they didn't isn't the fault of the edition, it's the fault of Codex: Space Marines, and it's (IMO) the root cause of why so many of us BT players are so upset. When we say it's "not BT" anymore it's because the army doesn't play anything near like what it used to (or, well, not if you want to have a chance of winning).


/endrant

Look, tbh the crusader buff is much better for us. I hated how the old codex worked, a shooty army was no fun. I tried to play my Templars as an assault force, and it worked on occasion, but to be consistently good I needed to play a shooting army. Now, while Crusader ist great, at least it encourages a more assault-oriented play style. What I really miss are the vows. Yes, they were overpowered, but it was still what made the bt stand out. Its like taking away the AOF'S from the sisters.

That's what I really want to see in a supplement- some form of vow.

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
Look, im not complaining. Im happy with what I have. Its just that from what Ive heard, Templars are no longer viewed favorably at GW. Im not saying that we need super special rules for assault or anything like that, I just wanted to know that my army is still viable, and will be for the next few editions. And as for sisters of battle, I have nothing but respect for those players. To show such dedication to an army that has been so abused... Its humbling!


Yeah, what really worried me was their absence from any recent novels or backround in 40k.

I understand where you're coming from BlackTemplar, and I realize the OP was more about background but I got a little sidetracked.

I think BT are just suffering from personal preferences of the current GW staff. I think the current writers have more interest in others areas in terms of Space Marines; they've been adding more Mongolian and cyborg marine stuff these days.

Part of the problem also comes from that the fact that Space Marines in general are saturated with the knightly theme. Black Templars sometimes come off as SUPER knightly space marines, and GW might just feel that's not as interesting as vampire-knight or monk-knight space marines.

But fear not, I imagine they will get back to Black Templars eventually. Who knows, maybe a new crusader will be added to the background, everyone know Templars are always down to crusade!

Sisters don't play anything like they used to.
At least we are still, basically, black space marines who like to hit things.

 Accolade wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Accolade wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That isn't the army's fault as much as the edition's fault.

bs. BT got a bunch of rubbish rules and more or less nothing to support getting into melee, so they can't. That's the army's fault, not the edition. They could easily have gotten something to help them be faster than the measly buff Crusader provides (say, something like Righteous Zeal...), something to help neuter shooting or something to let them consolidate into combat once per turn, that they didn't isn't the fault of the edition, it's the fault of Codex: Space Marines, and it's (IMO) the root cause of why so many of us BT players are so upset. When we say it's "not BT" anymore it's because the army doesn't play anything near like what it used to (or, well, not if you want to have a chance of winning).
:

WIth rules like wounds taken from the front and overwatch I think that this edition's rules has a *lot* to do with the neutering of *everyone's* ability to assault, let alone BT.

Exactly. I haven't seen an army yet that has anything that really counters to the edition's rules to make their assault units better. And it's not like BT are the only ones who got spanked with the Nerf Paddle in that regards either: Khorne Berzerkers are on that list as well as Genestealers, Orks and more.

In the case of Khorne Berzerkers and Genestealers it STILL isn't somehow magically "the edition's fault". It's the fault of the Codices for not giving them some sort of loophole, whether that be Genestealers that are allowed to assault from outflanking or Berzerkers that can assault from any vehicle. Orks are fair enough, they haven't gotten a new Codex since 6th, so their problems are due to the edition changing, but the others are Codex failures.

WHY, for the love of God, should each army have to have a loophole to get around the rules in the main rulebook??? Why would it not make more sense to balance out the main rules so that assault has a fair opportunity to be effective?

All this does is clog up the game with more and more miscellaneous rules.

Player 1: "Okay, you're assaulting my Tau, I get to Overwatch."
Player 2: "No, my Templars have Knight Visage, they get to attack before you can Overwatch."
Player 2: "Oh, well then I guess I'll never get to overwatch again".

EDIT: I should clarify, I very much like the Templars. But I feel these suggestions just come across as special snowflake syndrome and ignore the greater systemic issues that 40k faces in terms of making assaulty armies competitive.

Sometimes, it's easier to balance the game by making everything overpowered and over the top.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That isn't the army's fault as much as the edition's fault.

bs. BT got a bunch of rubbish rules and more or less nothing to support getting into melee, so they can't. That's the army's fault, not the edition. They could easily have gotten something to help them be faster than the measly buff Crusader provides (say, something like Righteous Zeal...), something to help neuter shooting or something to let them consolidate into combat once per turn, that they didn't isn't the fault of the edition, it's the fault of Codex: Space Marines, and it's (IMO) the root cause of why so many of us BT players are so upset. When we say it's "not BT" anymore it's because the army doesn't play anything near like what it used to (or, well, not if you want to have a chance of winning).


/endrant

Look, tbh the crusader buff is much better for us. I hated how the old codex worked, a shooty army was no fun. I tried to play my Templars as an assault force, and it worked on occasion, but to be consistently good I needed to play a shooting army. Now, while Crusader ist great, at least it encourages a more assault-oriented play style. What I really miss are the vows. Yes, they were overpowered, but it was still what made the bt stand out. Its like taking away the AOF'S from the sisters.

That's what I really want to see in a supplement- some form of vow.

BT vows overpowered?

Keep telling yourself that while my 2++ rerollable iron armed, warp speeded daemon prince sweeps your army or yet another taudar list makes MEQ players cry.

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That isn't the army's fault as much as the edition's fault.

bs. BT got a bunch of rubbish rules and more or less nothing to support getting into melee, so they can't. That's the army's fault, not the edition. They could easily have gotten something to help them be faster than the measly buff Crusader provides (say, something like Righteous Zeal...), something to help neuter shooting or something to let them consolidate into combat once per turn, that they didn't isn't the fault of the edition, it's the fault of Codex: Space Marines, and it's (IMO) the root cause of why so many of us BT players are so upset. When we say it's "not BT" anymore it's because the army doesn't play anything near like what it used to (or, well, not if you want to have a chance of winning).


/endrant

Look, tbh the crusader buff is much better for us. I hated how the old codex worked, a shooty army was no fun. I tried to play my Templars as an assault force, and it worked on occasion, but to be consistently good I needed to play a shooting army. Now, while Crusader ist great, at least it encourages a more assault-oriented play style. What I really miss are the vows. Yes, they were overpowered, but it was still what made the bt stand out. Its like taking away the AOF'S from the sisters.

That's what I really want to see in a supplement- some form of vow.

The thing is, Crusader is much worse than Righteous Zeal, so I'm not sure why you feel that there's more incentive to play Templars assaulty now, especially with the loss of Rage.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Digital dex or no, Sisters still play like they always has. Orks still haven't waited as long as BT had to in order to get a new Codex, and I'm not seeing anyone telling Orks to stop wanting better rules just because Tyranids, that other horde-centric Xenos Codex, got a new update. All those other Marine Chapter updates mean squat (pun intended) to someone who wants to play BT because they don't play the same. Sure, I could switch to playing some other Marine army (leading to a bunch of useless models just like for everyone else), but it wouldn't be the army I want to play, the army whose playstyle got me into the game in the first place.

Plus, the whole part where Sisters and Orks still have Codices, whereas BT don't.

Firstly, BT still have their rules in the Space Marine codex, they weren't thrown out in the trash never to be seen again. Sisters armies play the same way because they've never even had that many different units to actually encourage different builds.

And of course nobody is telling Ork players not to want better rules, that's not the issue. Ork players *probably* want a new edition, but I also don't see a thread called "Are Orks really dead?" proclaiming them to be left with the refuse.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Ideally I'd agree with you, but when the rulebook's overly restrictive it's no good sitting around for an entire edition going "well shucks, them's the rules".

That's in fact what happens to every other army that is not Space Marines. We're all stuck with the builds we felt made our army play "correctly" which have become non-viable and we have to come up with some new plan.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:How many of those allow for the playstyle that was up until recently allowed by Codex: Black Templars? Plus, you're again assuming that I'm interested in playing "Space Marines, any variation" instead of "Black Templars".

I know you want to play BT, and I don't have any issue with that. I just think that:

(a) BT can be played effectively with the Space Marines codex. If you're upset that one Space Marine build has a better version of what you want, that's how it has always been for Space Marines. That's why you see people jumping from new chapter to the new chapter, because each one typically has the best of a particular variation (i.e. bikes, assault troops, shooting, etc.)

(b) Making BT effective in close combat by effectively ignoring the rules of the main rulebook just clutters the game up that much more. I'd much rather see a fix to the main rulebook rather than a supplement that allows Templars to negate main rules so they can be awesome in CC, which makes no sense in the fluff (why are their marines so much better at CC than others?) and dumps on every other non-Space Marine army that supposedly is just as good at CC at BT.

Kain wrote:Sometimes, it's easier to balance the game by making everything overpowered and over the top.

/sigh, I mean I guess, and it may be true that this balances the game, but I feel like there is just such a glut of superfluous rules and playing a simple game becomes frustratingly complex

EDIT: trying to clean up all that quoting

Yeah, your right. However, zeal is gone. I miss it, but its done. So I have to work with what I have. Crusader allows BT squads to get those extra few inches of movement, which considering the small charge range is very important in this edition. And, to an extent, zeal was pretty overpowered. I mean, if freakin geanstealers lost their ability to charge after outflanking, I can understand why we lost it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I am not saying that BT should be better than anyone else in CC. I just want them to be viable in it. It breaks my heart to see all these shooty Templar lists. Yes, its effective, but it also contradicts the reason I love them- they fight face-to-face with their enemies. No more effectively than anyone else, mind you, but that's just the way they work.

They just made sure that BT will get an update every edition with all the latest toys available to the Astartes. I can't see how much more live you could hope for.

 Accolade wrote:


That's in fact what happens to every other army that is not Space Marines. We're all stuck with the builds we felt made our army play "correctly" which have become non-viable and we have to come up with some new plan.

It's happening to Marines too, I'm saying it shouldn't happen to anyone. Genestealers should have some sort of way of getting into assault other than having rely on their 5+ armour save, for example.

 Accolade wrote:
(a) BT can be played effectively with the Space Marines codex. If you're upset that one Space Marine build has a better version of what you want, that's how it has always been for Space Marines. That's why you see people jumping from new chapter to the new chapter, because each one typically has the best of a particular variation (i.e. bikes, assault troops, shooting, etc.)

The thing is, they arguably can't, it depends on how you define "playing BT effectively". If you mean that I can play an army painted as Black Templars and still have a competetive army using the Space Marine Codex I'd agree, because White Scar Bike lists and Tigurius Gravstars are pretty decent. If we take the more reasonable (IMO) definition of "playing BT effectively" as "playing with the BT rules in C:SM to make an effective army that follows the fluff of the BT" then the answer's probably no, just as World Eaters and Genestealer-centric lists are outta luck this edition.

Codex jumping isn't even really possible as Black Templars, because no one else does the whole "angry tide of Zealots" thing (and no one does dedicated Drop Pod Assaults better than anyone else IMO). The closest you get is Khorne Berzerkers, who are stuck in the same situation.

 Accolade wrote:


(b) Making BT effective in close combat by effectively ignoring the rules of the main rulebook just clutters the game up that much more. I'd much rather see a fix to the main rulebook rather than a supplement that allows Templars to negate main rules so they can be awesome in CC, which makes no sense in the fluff (why are their marines so much better at CC than others?) and dumps on every other non-Space Marine army that supposedly is just as good at CC at BT.

I'd much rather see a rulebook fix as well, but I'd ALSO like to not have to sit around for yet another edition of being meaningless competetively. As for why BT are better than others at CC, why are Imperial Fists better with Bolters than everyone else? Why are Iron Hands hardier than others? Why are Salamanders better at using Flamers than anyone else? Because it's their thing, it's what they do. CC is what the BT do. Ideally (in my mind at least) BT and BA would be the two melee-centric specialists with BA focusing on speed and local superiority whereas BT are about a subtle as a sledgehammer.

Jefffar wrote:
They just made sure that BT will get an update every edition with all the latest toys available to the Astartes. I can't see how much more live you could hope for.

None of that matters when all the toys are for a playstyle that isn't BT in the first place. Unless GW makes C:SM capable of fielding powerful melee-centric lists all the shooty stuff just serves to further frustrate those of us who picked BT because we wanted to play a melee army (which I'm guessing is a bunch, if not the majority, of us BT players).

All I collect are marines, and even I think having six Codices devoted to men in power armor is a little excessive. I know people hate on dataslates a lot but I think they're a great idea for providing that extra edge of special snowflake that people want without getting too absurd. And I think they play quite differently, too...

For example, I think someone running Iron Hands chapter tactics (with their supplement) runs a list that is as appreciably different from vanilla marines than a Blood or Dark angels army...

 Accolade wrote:

Kain wrote:Sometimes, it's easier to balance the game by making everything overpowered and over the top.

/sigh, I mean I guess, and it may be true that this balances the game, but I feel like there is just such a glut of superfluous rules and playing a simple game becomes frustratingly complex

EDIT: trying to clean up all that quoting

I wouldn't be worried about 40k becoming increasingly over the top until five editions down the line, a unit pops up with a weapon that specifies that they're taking a galaxy and throwing it as a shuriken Gurren Lagaan style.

 Colpicklejar wrote:

For example, I think someone running Iron Hands chapter tactics (with their supplement) runs a list that is as appreciably different from vanilla marines than a Blood or Dark angels army...

This right here cuts to the heart of the issue, in a way.

How do you build a competetive list that capitalizes on Chapter Tactics: Black Templars?

Well, to start off, you can't build around Adamantium Will. Crusader adds, on average, around 0.89" of movement per turn IIRC, and running across the field with melee units would take more than an extra 0.89" movement, so that doesn't work either.

Rerolls and rending in Challenges is decent, but again nothing you can base your entire strategy on. It's pretty fluffy, but would it really have broken the game to just give us our damn rerolls from 5th edition back? Even if it was only Hatred, it'd still have done something to help us actually be good at CC.

That leaves the Crusader Squad. No other Chapter Tactics gets 5-man Lasplas squads and no other Chapter Tactics can field scoring Assault Marines on foot. The only problem is, Assault Marines are rubbish, scoring or not, jumping or not.

That leaves Templars with a Chapter Tactics that lets them spam shooty MSU MEQ Troops better than anyone else. All the stuff that BT are supposedly good at in fluff is slightly less rubbish than everyone else's, while the only good part is something that'd have been pretty cool in 5th edition (indeed, the old Lasplas squad held up rather decently through 5th) but which in 6th edition's shooty meta doesn't do nearly well enough, while at the same time running completely countrary to the fluff.

Some of us didnt want to play vanilla, we wanted our own identity, and latched onto the playstyle and fluff of Black Templars. Now that theyre vanilla plus with altered fluff what is the point? Its not what I paid for, and for me this is a business relationship.

Some people wanted to play with the Holy Orb of Antioch, which is totally not a ripoff from the cult of Cegorach. I mean Monty Python.

Templars were pretty vanilla to start with, and even their codex was fairly vanilla at the time it came out.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Templars were pretty vanilla to start with, and even their codex was fairly vanilla at the time it came out.

Yeah, except for the parts that weren't, the parts that made the difference in playstyle.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Colpicklejar wrote:

For example, I think someone running Iron Hands chapter tactics (with their supplement) runs a list that is as appreciably different from vanilla marines than a Blood or Dark angels army...

This right here cuts to the heart of the issue, in a way.

How do you build a competetive list that capitalizes on Chapter Tactics: Black Templars?

Well, to start off, you can't build around Adamantium Will. Crusader adds, on average, around 0.89" of movement per turn IIRC, and running across the field with melee units would take more than an extra 0.89" movement, so that doesn't work either.

Rerolls and rending in Challenges is decent, but again nothing you can base your entire strategy on. It's pretty fluffy, but would it really have broken the game to just give us our damn rerolls from 5th edition back? Even if it was only Hatred, it'd still have done something to help us actually be good at CC.

That leaves the Crusader Squad. No other Chapter Tactics gets 5-man Lasplas squads and no other Chapter Tactics can field scoring Assault Marines on foot. The only problem is, Assault Marines are rubbish, scoring or not, jumping or not.

That leaves Templars with a Chapter Tactics that lets them spam shooty MSU MEQ Troops better than anyone else. All the stuff that BT are supposedly good at in fluff is slightly less rubbish than everyone else's, while the only good part is something that'd have been pretty cool in 5th edition (indeed, the old Lasplas squad held up rather decently through 5th) but which in 6th edition's shooty meta doesn't do nearly well enough, while at the same time running completely countrary to the fluff.

And that's exactly what's wrong with BT now. I don't want to run 5 man las/plas squads!
However, crusader squads with bp/cs may suck, but I still use them. They can be effective, if used right. a twenty man squad with no transport can attract a lot of firepower, after all. And having 2 attacks every round of combat is HUGE.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
And saying that black Templars are vanilla to begin with is like saying that sisters of battle are female space marines.

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
Sisters don't play anything like they used to.
At least we are still, basically, black space marines who like to hit things.

Huh? Sisters are still more or less the same in terms of playstyle, if we're comparing their 5e 'dex to their 6e one. Short-range shooting with an emphasis on meltas.

 Troike wrote:

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
Sisters don't play anything like they used to.
At least we are still, basically, black space marines who like to hit things.

Huh? Sisters are still more or less the same in terms of playstyle, if we're comparing their 5e 'dex to their 6e one. Short-range shooting with an emphasis on meltas.

No, im talking pre fifth, back when inquisitorial troops was a thing

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Templars were pretty vanilla to start with, and even their codex was fairly vanilla at the time it came out.

Yeah, except for the parts that weren't, the parts that made the difference in playstyle.

There wasn't much, and save for Vows, the Holy Orb and the old Machine Spirit options, you still have everything else (namely Crusader Squads and DT Crusaders). Oh and your Chapter Master equiv got buffed, even if he's not called a Grand Marshall anymore.

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
is like saying that sisters of battle are female space marines.

You mean they're not? Well dang, there goes that army idea...