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.

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
Yes, it was the case. In fact, in the book Heslreach the main character flat out denies it, and accuses those who do of being weak. And while the champion may seem religious, he is moreso a pious warrior than a paladin. I dunno, maybe im being petty, but that change just felt like a slap in the face

Ah, but you see, Black Library fluff and Codex fluff don't always like up. Authors get a lot of freedom with 40K, and canon isn't enforced too tightly. So Dembski-Bowden's Templars don't have to quite line up with what's written in the codex, as may have been the case here (and, truth to be told, I vastly prefer the 6E Marine codex's version of how the Templars approach faith and the faithful as opposed to this BL version).

To rephrase my question, then, did their actual codex ever specifically say that they didnt worship the Emperor as a god?

 Happyjew wrote:
Per the codex anything that refers to C: Black Templar (like the BRB Allies Matrix) now refers to SM with Black Templar Chapter Tactics.

Yeah the BT Entry on the matrix is gone.............as shown in the most conclusive way by the most recent Codexes.

re the Belief of the BT'sin Helsreach - direct quote:

"In my presence, you have just expressed the notion that the Emperor of Mankind is not your god, as He is for the entire glorious Imperium. Whilst I am not blind to the ..separatist elements within the Mechanicus, the fact remains you are speaking heresy before a Reclusiarch of the Emperor's Chosen"

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Per the codex anything that refers to C: Black Templar (like the BRB Allies Matrix) now refers to SM with Black Templar Chapter Tactics.

Yeah the BT Entry on the matrix is gone.............as shown in the most conclusive way by the most recent Codexes.

Exactly. Either the BT don't have an allies chart slot anymore or they're strangely missing from any codex that has an allies chart and that doesn't make nearly as much sense.

When using the new mini-dexes (LotD, =I=, and Imp Knights), you use the SM entry (as there is no "Black Templar"). When using regular codices, you use the allies matrix as presented in the BRB. Since that Matrix references C: BT, you instead treat that single column as C: SM (CT BT).

 Happyjew wrote:
When using the new mini-dexes (LotD, =I=, and Imp Knights), you use the SM entry (as there is no "Black Templar"). When using regular codices, you use the allies matrix as presented in the BRB. Since that Matrix references C: BT, you instead treat that single column as C: SM (CT BT).

"But that's not RAW"!

Sorry, I had to get that out of the way.

It's stuff like that I keep pestering GW FAQs about but they don't seem too interested in putting out FAQs right now (which prompted me to send the biggest FAQ I've seen lately: when are we getting another update?).

 Happyjew wrote:
When using the new mini-dexes (LotD, =I=, and Imp Knights), you use the SM entry (as there is no "Black Templar"). When using regular codices, you use the allies matrix as presented in the BRB. Since that Matrix references C: BT, you instead treat that single column as C: SM (CT BT).

Why ?

I don''t see the point in anyone clinging to this controversial view? The BRB Matrix is horribly against the actual fluff - If the new Astra M (Imperial Guard) does not have them listed - its another nail in the confin (thank the Emperor)

Personally, I don't care. Unfortunately I spend too much time in YMDC I tend to take a RAW viewpoint, whether or not I play that way.

 Happyjew wrote:
Personally, I don't care. Unfortunately I spend too much time in YMDC I tend to take a RAW viewpoint, whether or not I play that way.

Except RAW doesn't support giving an army allies when it doesn't have an entry on the chart....

You know, reading these posts makes me realize that we don't have it so bad! Worshipping the emperor actually fits us, in a strange way. And it certainly simplifies how BT roll! And as for the allies chart, while at first the loss of BT on it was frustrating, honestly using the c: sm matrix works better fluff-wise thatn our original chart. Figures

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
You know, reading these posts makes me realize that we don't have it so bad! Worshipping the emperor actually fits us, in a strange way. And it certainly simplifies how BT roll! And as for the allies chart, while at first the loss of BT on it was frustrating, honestly using the c: sm matrix works better fluff-wise thatn our original chart. Figures

Now you just need to convert the other 80,000 BT players who are still running around saying that the current situation is the worst thing that could have happened to the book!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
You know, reading these posts makes me realize that we don't have it so bad! Worshipping the emperor actually fits us, in a strange way. And it certainly simplifies how BT roll! And as for the allies chart, while at first the loss of BT on it was frustrating, honestly using the c: sm matrix works better fluff-wise thatn our original chart. Figures

Now you just need to convert the other 80,000 BT players who are still running around saying that the current situation is the worst thing that could have happened to the book!

One at a time, my friend, one at a time..

Helsreach made me look at the Black Templars in a new light and even buy a small army of them

Templars are a Marine army I've considered a few times. If I ever decide to start a loyalist Marine army they are on a very short list of possibilities.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Templars are a Marine army I've considered a few times. If I ever decide to start a loyalist Marine army they are on a very short list of possibilities.

Well, look on the bright side: no matter what you pick, it'll be in plastic

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Templars are a Marine army I've considered a few times. If I ever decide to start a loyalist Marine army they are on a very short list of possibilities.

Well, look on the bright side: no matter what you pick, it'll be in plastic

True. But on the flip side I can't beat muggers to death with my army!

Well maybe with CSM I can, all those spikes could cause bleeding afterall....

Those are uhh...devotional spikes, to show that the Marine is deeply devoted to the Emperor.

 Mr Morden wrote:

"In my presence, you have just expressed the notion that the Emperor of Mankind is not your god, as He is for the entire glorious Imperium. Whilst I am not blind to the ..separatist elements within the Mechanicus, the fact remains you are speaking heresy before a Reclusiarch of the Emperor's Chosen"

Black Templars have never really been anything more than Las/Plas squads, on the tabletop.

Their most optimized list was a gunline.

 Troike wrote:

 BlackTemplar1 wrote:
Yes, it was the case. In fact, in the book Heslreach the main character flat out denies it, and accuses those who do of being weak. And while the champion may seem religious, he is moreso a pious warrior than a paladin. I dunno, maybe im being petty, but that change just felt like a slap in the face

Ah, but you see, Black Library fluff and Codex fluff don't always like up. Authors get a lot of freedom with 40K, and canon isn't enforced too tightly. So Dembski-Bowden's Templars don't have to quite line up with what's written in the codex, as may have been the case here (and, truth to be told, I vastly prefer the 6E Marine codex's version of how the Templars approach faith and the faithful as opposed to this BL version).

To rephrase my question, then, did their actual codex ever specifically say that they didnt worship the Emperor as a god?

More like there is no canon because GW can't be assed to make one.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Black Templars have never really been anything more than Las/Plas squads, on the tabletop.

Their most optimized list was a gunline.

Except for in 4th edition. You know, the edition the Codex was written for.

 Troike wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

"In my presence, you have just expressed the notion that the Emperor of Mankind is not your god, as He is for the entire glorious Imperium. Whilst I am not blind to the ..separatist elements within the Mechanicus, the fact remains you are speaking heresy before a Reclusiarch of the Emperor's Chosen"

Wait, so this quote's implying that that book does have them regarding the Emperor as a god?

 Mr Morden wrote:
Its pretty clear from this quote - delivered to a senior commander of a Ttian legion, inside her Imperator Titan no less, and other throuhgout the book that they worship the Emperor.

Huh. Well, 1d4chan is claiming that the sequel to that book, called Blood and Fire and also written by Dembski-Bowden, has Grimaldus specifically denying that they worship him. Maybe an oversight on ADB's part, or just 1d4chan being wrong? Meh, regardless, I'l stick to the codex fluff all the same.

1d4Chan is often wrong. The attribute Ward to writing about Sisters dying constantly but can only offer the one instance where he did kill them: the Blood Tide.

This is what happens when angry neckbeards run wikis.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Black Templars have never really been anything more than Las/Plas squads, on the tabletop.

Their most optimized list was a gunline.

Congratulations, a completely uninformed opinion. This is why you do homework before opening your mouth, to avoid looking stupid.

 Troike wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Its pretty clear from this quote - delivered to a senior commander of a Ttian legion, inside her Imperator Titan no less, and other throuhgout the book that they worship the Emperor.

Huh. Well, 1d4chan is claiming that the sequel to that book, called Blood and Fire and also written by Dembski-Bowden, has Grimaldus specifically denying that they worship him. Maybe an oversight on ADB's part, or just 1d4chan being wrong? Meh, regardless, I'l stick to the codex fluff all the same.

I'd ask for quotes that contradict the one given

I have not got Blood and Fire so can't help there.................

 ClockworkZion wrote:
1d4Chan is often wrong. The attribute Ward to writing about Sisters dying constantly but can only offer the one instance where he did kill them: the Blood Tide.

This is what happens when angry neckbeards run wikis.

I wonder if they are also trying to blame the Sanctuary 101 thing on him too since he did the latest Necron codex, and they conveniently forgot that it's really old fluff

nobody wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
1d4Chan is often wrong. The attribute Ward to writing about Sisters dying constantly but can only offer the one instance where he did kill them: the Blood Tide.

This is what happens when angry neckbeards run wikis.

I wonder if they are also trying to blame the Sanctuary 101 thing on him too since he did the latest Necron codex, and they conveniently forgot that it's really old fluff

Probably. Mindless hate tends to override common sense and fact.

Dead, no but I think they got weaker.

The issue I felt they had was they had nothing uniquely theirs to stand out from other chapters. Sure having all the nice shooting options of codex following chapters is nice, but they don't feel like horde of angry crusaders. Hopefully the rumored supplement will fix this so that my Emperor's Champion doesn't become a display piece

 d3m01iti0n wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Black Templars have never really been anything more than Las/Plas squads, on the tabletop.

Their most optimized list was a gunline.

Congratulations, a completely uninformed opinion. This is why you do homework before opening your mouth, to avoid looking stupid.

I'm right and you're wrong, though.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 d3m01iti0n wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Black Templars have never really been anything more than Las/Plas squads, on the tabletop.

Their most optimized list was a gunline.

Congratulations, a completely uninformed opinion. This is why you do homework before opening your mouth, to avoid looking stupid.

I'm right and you're wrong, though.

No