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.

So my observation is that the main characters/factions of 40k are all some form of terrible. Some more so, some less. The entire Imperium seems to be a case study in awful, with a heavy dose of inability to perceive itself. At the heart of this seems to be the Black Templars. But they are also kind of a wasted character arc. They seem to be a copy/paste of the Ecliesiarchy as a whole. They are the Misters of Battle basically. The best you can say is they are dialed up to 11. That's it. Everything else about them is just a redo of other group's themes.

So what is the use of Black Templars as a theme? Are they kind of a foil against the characters you should be rooting for? In the DOW books, they seem like psychopathic zealots, who prioritize their honor and self imposed debts over service to the emperor.

They’re the 40K version of European Crusaders. A view of what the Imperium might’ve become had all Chapters viewed The Emperor as a god.

In a sense they’re the ultimate perversion of Imperial Truth, and the ultimate endorsement of Lorgar’s teachings.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So what is the use of Black Templars as a theme? Are they kind of a foil against the characters you should be rooting for? In the DOW books, they seem like psychopathic zealots, who prioritize their honor and self imposed debts over service to the emperor.

I think the name kind of says it all. They're Templars, clearly hearkening to the crusader knights that (depending on who you ask) either lost the plot or were victims of a vicious smear campaign, but were at one point pretty zealous single-minded killers.

They're also black ones, which is like cool and dark. The White Templars might actually be decent chaps, if a bit boring, but the Black Templars are edgy. Probably chew tobacco and use curse words.

My first experience of them was the monstrously cheaty codex they got in 3rd edition, with the remarkable rule that if they routed, they attacked even more or something. The local hobby shop had a run on black and white paint when that book came out, I tell you. No idea what they're up to now. The whole thing felt like a cash grab.

Space Marines are Knights in Space as one of their themes. The Black Templars are the most adherent to that theme. Zealous Crusader archtype.

Perhaps it's an overused trope. But tropes are tropes because they work. Being cliche is not always the wrong answer, in-fact most of the time it is the right answer.

The point has probably just to be the ultimate caricatural knights in space qite frankly, I doubt their genesis goes any deeper than that. Then they got a lore and ya di ya di ya, even becoming as said grotsnik ironicly the perfect Lorgar boys in a way.

But at the get go I'm pretty sure someone at GW thought "look. Crusaders in space that know nothing of reason and just wander off in the galaxy to smash everybody like badass superhuman. How is that not cool?"

As others have pointed out, they're one of the subfactions most known for that crusade-y aesthetic. The "misters of battle" thing was honestly probably a big part of the appeal for a lot of people for a long time. If you wanted to be an ecclesiarchal faction, you could either collect a million guardsmen and some priests, convert your retirement fund into pewter sisters of battle, or you could buy some ever-available space marines and make jokes about the Holy Handgrenade of Antioch.

Personally, my biggest gripe with Black Templars is that they seem to be sharing an aesthetic niche with Dark Angels. I know there are plenty of differences between them, but did we really need two major marine chapters with a "knight" aesthetic (ignoring GK for now)?

But yeah, as someone who doesn't really *get* Black Templars, I think they're just very comfortably the embodiment of a lot of 40k's themes. If you like the themes of zealotry and transhuman soldiers general not-nice war lust, Black Templars are kind of the chapter that embodies that the most. Ultramarines may be the poster boys, but that's because they look heroic and get to pretend that there are good guys in 40k. Templars don't try to convince the audience that they're not so bad after all; they hit you over the head with the idea that the imperium is full of bad guys who think their xenophobic murder sprees are holy and noble.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Personally, my biggest gripe with Black Templars is that they seem to be sharing an aesthetic niche with Dark Angels. I know there are plenty of differences between them, but did we really need two major marine chapters with a "knight" aesthetic (ignoring GK for now)?

Isn't it more fair to call that a gripe with Dark Angels?

If I'm remembering things correctly, BT's got there first. While the early Emperor's Champion models were already looking straight outta Brettonia, Dark Angels models were still just regular marines in habits. Then the next version they were that but also liked plasma. I think it was the later iterations of DA kits and the expanded lore from the Horus Heresy novels that made DA so knighty.

Obviously I wasn't there, but I'm sourcing from the french lore site Taran, which pretty much translated all 1 and 2 edition lore up to early 3rd for some articles, and then looking up publishment dates on the lexicanum.

According to it, i think the dark angels came in 2nd edition with codex angels of death, published 1996, whereas BT came to actually be defined in WD77 of september 2000. At the beginning, the dark angels in fact even were wearing black armour as those of the BT.

However, in these translated articles that they summarised into one big one, it stands out that the history of the Dark Angels, while being the same at heart, lacked many detail regarding what occured at the time of the horus heresy.

Note that the lion is said to be sleeping at the heart of Caliban, unknown to anyone safe the emperor himself. Dunno where he came from in his current iteration.

DA lore in that case might actually have expanded in the details we know today as of 2006 with the start of the HH book series by BL.

The BT started to be fleshed out as of 2000 with codex armaggedon and onward with their own codex from 2006.

Link to taran for french speaking fellows amongst you, or if you feel like checking with google/yandex translate or whatever:

http://patatovitch.free.fr/smdarkangel.htm

Different flavours of Knights.

Black Templars ultimately remain on a self-imposed Penitent Crusade, thanks to their founder Sigismund being a bit of a nutter.

Dark Angels are more Monastic Knights, pre-Crusade with their well kept secrets, great big flying Space Monestary and holding on to relics and knowledge of the past.

Both are romanticised and fantastical takes on different historical periods.

Yeah honestly Dark Angels strike me as the space marine special boys chapter that has the least reason to exist thematically rather than BT. The main reason BT exist practically today is that GW still wants to get the dollarbucks from the people who obsessively leave through space marine bolter porn novels leaving sweat and drool on every page trying to find instances of space marines stomping on, shooting or strangling unarmed noncombatants so they can post them in big compilations on social media with titles like "BbbbbbBASED ALERTTTTT!!!!!!!!1!!!"

The thematic reason they exist is, yeah, overzealous ignorant technobarbarian crusaders.

The reason I say they have reason to exist over DA is that theyve got that one theme - and DA are like "no we have all the themes!"

"Were the guys that have the lost advanced technology that we've managed to preserve, and we're also the marines that are like knights/monks, and we're also the Super Indomitable Fearless Ones, oh oh but also we're the super fast bike chapter! And also we have a whole army that's terminators so you can do all-terminators! And we're so, so secretive and sneaky you guys you wouldnt believe how sneaky. And also our thing is plasma, we've got all the plasma guns!"

They literally just have so many themes and so many shticks that step directly on the toes of like every other space marine chapter at once, its always been funny that people pick Ultramarines and Space Wolves to ragepost about when, in my eyes, everyone who actually is a space marine fan should be annoyed at Dark Angels. At least UM and SW primarily stick to their lanes, and it's not like theres some OTHER roman legion themed loyalist subfaction or some other viking or wolf themed space marines.

It's to have something to sell to those Germans that are still salty because of Tannenberg and that think germans actually civilized the savage Slavs in the east. (Yes, sadly enough these people exist...)

More serious answer: They're probably the most obvious "Knights in Space" Marine chapter, so that's something I guess. Dark Angels look more like monks. Background wize DA seem more like Arturian Knights, so early middle ages, while teutonic order is high to late middle ages.

Dark Angels are more like the conspiracy, secret society, illuminatii theme knights. The Black Templars are more straightforward zealots knights.

Dark Angels are the Knight's Templar while the Black Templars are the Teutonic Knights.

Is there some overlap? Yes, but thats ok.

 the_scotsman wrote:
!!"

The thematic reason they exist is, yeah, overzealous ignorant technobarbarian crusaders.

The premise in the OP is this is the theme of the entire Imperium. Every cadian or space marine starter box and battleforce could include a screaming missionary with a chainsaw flamethrower, that’s the aesthetic of the whole imperium. The black templars function as a sink for those things. To mix metaphors, they sanitize the rest of the imperium. Treadheads, SPQR people, and Warhammer fans in genral find it helpful to have the caricature of the bbbbased alert black Templar fan, so they can pretend to be cleaner and less “chud”-dy

As far as I know, the broken rules from third edition, and most of the background about melee squads etc come from a semi-personal project by a studio member. They were essentially house rules

pelicaniforce wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
!!"

The thematic reason they exist is, yeah, overzealous ignorant technobarbarian crusaders.

The premise in the OP is this is the theme of the entire Imperium. Every cadian or space marine starter box and battleforce could include a screaming missionary with a chainsaw flamethrower, that’s the aesthetic of the whole imperium. The black templars function as a sink for those things. To mix metaphors, they sanitize the rest of the imperium. Treadheads, SPQR people, and Warhammer fans in genral find it helpful to have the caricature of the bbbbased alert black Templar fan, so they can pretend to be cleaner and less “chud”-dy

As far as I know, the broken rules from third edition, and most of the background about melee squads etc come from a semi-personal project by a studio member. They were essentially house rules

But the Templars go to extremes even the already hateful Imperium doesn't, especially in consideration of other Astartes chapters. They flaunt the rules that govern Astartes chapters, they worship the Emperor as a god - which is a rarity for Space Marine chapter cults, etc. Even Kharn himself notes that Sigismund is particularly screwed up in their duel on Terra.

It's like the difference between Red Scorpions and other SM.

Also, while we're on this note. What's bad about being into tanks? There are terms for people overly obsessed with certain historical militaries already; no need to paint with a broad brush.

pelicaniforce wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
!!"

The thematic reason they exist is, yeah, overzealous ignorant technobarbarian crusaders.

The premise in the OP is this is the theme of the entire Imperium. Every cadian or space marine starter box and battleforce could include a screaming missionary with a chainsaw flamethrower, that’s the aesthetic of the whole imperium. The black templars function as a sink for those things. To mix metaphors, they sanitize the rest of the imperium. Treadheads, SPQR people, and Warhammer fans in genral find it helpful to have the caricature of the bbbbased alert black Templar fan, so they can pretend to be cleaner and less “chud”-dy

Looks at Cadian, Custodes, Primaris, and Ad-Mech Starter Sets, seeing nothing except tacti-cool or faux-roman gak everywhere. Yeah, a screaming missionary with a chainsaw flamethrower isn't the aesthetic of the entire Imperium. They have some Eastern-European influences, Roman, Germanic, Greek, and are inpsired by nomadic cultures (such as the Huns). That's a massive over-generalization of an entire faction's theme, aesthetics, and looks. Also, what's wrong with people whom you disagree with liking the Black Templars and how're they chuds for liking them? Seems like you're the actual chud here in this instance, telling people how to enjoy their hobby.

Black Templars are a red flag faction because they are often associated with less desirable elements of the Warhammer fanbase such as homophobes, transphobes, racists and sexists.
The kind of person who will see a rainbow Space Marine, say "Heresy!" and post a really bad meme about burning heretics but also genuinely post hate speech at the same time and declare they're "Keeping politics out of the hobby".

It's a sad association but Templars suffer more than most from being a faction where utter morons don't see the obvious "You should not idolise these people" banner despite GW actually doing a relatively consistent job in portraying the Templars as raving lunatics.

 Gert wrote:
Black Templars are a red flag faction because they are often associated with less desirable elements of the Warhammer fanbase such as homophobes, transphobes, racists and sexists.
The kind of person who will see a rainbow Space Marine, say "Heresy!" and post a really bad meme about burning heretics but also genuinely post hate speech at the same time and declare they're "Keeping politics out of the hobby".

It's a sad association but Templars suffer more than most from being a faction where utter morons don't see the obvious "You should not idolise these people" banner despite GW actually doing a relatively consistent job in portraying the Templars as raving lunatics.

I don't really think this is a faction specific problem, but whatever. Yeah, there will be a few idiots who don't realize the Templars are basically a barely-sanitized version of Medieval Crusaders. Yes, there will be people who will say stupid stuff about a rather insignificant model in the grander scheme of things. However, I wouldn't let it impact my entire view of a faction. I heavily dislike religion, but I highly doubt Genestealer Cults players are all mormons or scientologists. These people are usually a small enough minority that they get shut down immediately, when trying to espouse their beliefs.

Also, GW hasn't done a very great job at portraying the "evil space fascists" as actually evil. Guilliman's quote contradicts that statement quite a bit when he's addressing the current state of the Imperium. Maybe, because said satire didn't sell as well as an actual setting one can dive into/take seriously at all/even be immersed in? GW pays lip service to the setting's dying satire all the time over the years with statements like, "everything is canon, nothing is canon". Just, so they don't actually have to address the fact there setting is no longer a satire; it's just a fictional sandbox with slight satirical elements left over from it's gradual development over time.

I guess what I'm trying to illustrate is not everyone finds the satire of Warhammer, engaging or really even well done for that matter. I find (most of) it obnoxious, highly surface-level, and very preachy as someone who's apolitical. Kyril Sinderman's speech was one of the few examples I enjoyed. Also, the Council of Nikaea was very interesting and gives a great insight into Imperial politics. However, I mainly enjoy this setting for one thing: the brutal, soul-grinding warfare of the far future.

 Abanshee wrote:

I guess what I'm trying to illustrate is not everyone finds the satire of Warhammer, engaging or really even well done for that matter. I find (most of) it obnoxious, highly surface-level, and very preachy as someone who's apolitical. Kyril Sinderman's speech was one of the few examples I enjoyed. Also, the Council of Nikaea was very interesting and gives a great insight into Imperial politics. However, I mainly enjoy this setting for one thing: the brutal, soul-grinding warfare of the far future.

Indeed. If you want to appreciate the satire of 40k that is fine, but you shouldn't be gatekeeping the hobby against those who unironically like parts of it. If someone unironically likes the zealous Black Templar's faith and over the top nature then good for them finding what they like. They're not a bad person for doing that.

The black Templars, for me, has always been a microcosm of the larger story of WH40k- that being, someone started this thing with the best intentions in mind, buuuuuut...

In the HH books, we get a good look at Sigismund's mindset that even when everyone else is saying "Emps is not a god"- he still shelters Keeler and reads the Lectio Divinatus and BELIEVES. Apparently, he found like minded individuals during the 2nd founding when the fists got cut up, but it was kept on the low, as by the time of War of the Beast the BT's had still not openly worshipped the Emperor.. Until Magneric went all zealous and started calling the Emperor's name in battle. I haven't gotten 100% thru the audiobooks, but I do know both Koorland and Vulkan stated that the Imperial Cult was a big no-no. HOWEVER- when they find out that one's faith can actually turn aside warp-based powers, they're a bit more forgiving.

So, what started as a fraternity of like-minded battle brothers eventually turned into the zealous, hyprocracy-ridden purgefest known as the Black Templars, just as Emp's imperial Truth got transmuted into the Imperial Creed, for other's ends and not the original intent.. Still think it's BS that space marine chapter strength is limited.. unless you're on a Crusade... Which is all BT do!

 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed. If you want to appreciate the satire of 40k that is fine, but you shouldn't be gatekeeping the hobby against those who unironically like parts of it. If someone unironically likes the zealous Black Templar's faith and over the top nature then good for them finding what they like. They're not a bad person for doing that.

I'm not up on the current modeling, but do Stormboyz still wear M35-inspired helmets and goose-step all over the place?

Because that was funny.

 Gert wrote:
Black Templars are a red flag faction because they are often associated with less desirable elements of the Warhammer fanbase such as homophobes, transphobes, racists and sexists.
The kind of person who will see a rainbow Space Marine, say "Heresy!" and post a really bad meme about burning heretics but also genuinely post hate speech at the same time and declare they're "Keeping politics out of the hobby".

It's a sad association but Templars suffer more than most from being a faction where utter morons don't see the obvious "You should not idolise these people" banner despite GW actually doing a relatively consistent job in portraying the Templars as raving lunatics.

That takes me back. When I first started 40k I wanted to make a black templar army. I loved the knight theme and the black and white scheme, but the store and some friends steered me away for the reasons you stated, and I am glad they did because a lot of the BT players in the area turned out to be very hateful, and in some cases proud neo-nazi's.

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed. If you want to appreciate the satire of 40k that is fine, but you shouldn't be gatekeeping the hobby against those who unironically like parts of it. If someone unironically likes the zealous Black Templar's faith and over the top nature then good for them finding what they like. They're not a bad person for doing that.

I'm not up on the current modeling, but do Stormboyz still wear M35-inspired helmets and goose-step all over the place?

Because that was funny.

They don't but hey, we can still convert, i imagine spellcrow or anvil industry or someone else must have some .

Stormboiz are, i my view, really one of those 2 layered units: silly space ork on rocket when I used to be younger, then grown up a bit I understood how they made fun of the teenage crisis and as such they're so much more funny to me.

Dark angels are better, you are correct black templars should be killed off so they stop honing in on dark angels armor themes.

I don't think BT are a bad theme, I just think they're lazy. You already have Sisters, the literal Church, The DA, the Word Bearers, and countless other psychopathic Westboro Baptist meme warriors. What purpose does THIS itieration serve in the lore. ALso, should point out that the CURRENT lore scope and direction is very far removed from the base of lore that created the original BT. Almost unrecognizable. We have countless examples of the Space Marines testifying to the known fact that the Emperor is not a god. If that is the case, how do we have BT? It really doesn't make sense to me.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I don't think BT are a bad theme, I just think they're lazy. You already have Sisters, the literal Church, The DA, the Word Bearers, and countless other psychopathic Westboro Baptist meme warriors. What purpose does THIS itieration serve in the lore. ALso, should point out that the CURRENT lore scope and direction is very far removed from the base of lore that created the original BT. Almost unrecognizable. We have countless examples of the Space Marines testifying to the known fact that the Emperor is not a god. If that is the case, how do we have BT? It really doesn't make sense to me.

Well, to me that's the purpose of their theme. the counterexample to those chapters.

GW tells you that Chapters can have different beliefs and practices, right? Then it would be odd if every single Chapter of loyal Space Marines happened to share the belief that the Emperor is not divine. Not one single Chapter believes otherwise?

I feel like the Black Templars are there for a specific niche. They are Imperial Cult devoted, but also Space Marines rather than Sisters of Battle. So it creates that space for a player who wants a 'faith adjacent' army that isn't SOB. Plus, it then takes some (maybe not enough) restrictions so that it isn't just "Space Marines+" by eliminating Librarians.

I personally think they are kind of neat, even though I don't play them. I feel like their inclusion has allowed GW to tell some pretty cool stories about faith with Space Marines, both negative (like the one in the Dawn of Fire series) and positive (like Helsreach with Grimaldus). I think their inclusion has broadened the scope of what a Chapter looks like in a good way--though I do wish there were a bit more divergent chapter organizations and less focused development on particular ones like the BT and SW (more options, less stuff in each option).

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I don't think BT are a bad theme, I just think they're lazy. You already have Sisters, the literal Church, The DA, the Word Bearers, and countless other psychopathic Westboro Baptist meme warriors. What purpose does THIS itieration serve in the lore. ALso, should point out that the CURRENT lore scope and direction is very far removed from the base of lore that created the original BT. Almost unrecognizable. We have countless examples of the Space Marines testifying to the known fact that the Emperor is not a god. If that is the case, how do we have BT? It really doesn't make sense to me.

They are a crusade-based chapter of swordsman that view the Emperor as a God. Emphasis on the CRUSADE part, Dark Angels and Word Bearers are much, much different. Dark Angels are like King Arthur and the Roundtable in space, while the
Word Bearers are like a demonic church in space. Black Templars are upon a eternal crusade in the God-Emperor's name. There the Imperial Fists with the legion culture of the World Eaters. Dark Angels are currently killing off all of their traitors and have no real concern outside of doing that. Word Bearers just go around burning books, desecrating religious monuments, and slaughtering non-believers in the name of the Ruinous Powers. They're space crusaders, quite literally in every sense of the word.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Boosykes wrote:
Dark angels are better, you are correct black templars should be killed off so they stop honing in on dark angels armor themes.

Bro, Dork Angels are irrelevant. Your one trait that made you unique is also shared by the Iron Hands and White Scars (Sagyar Mazan and the remaining Iron Hands that betrayed Meduson). Also, I'm fairly sure a few Salamanders and Raven Guard
turned traitor at the Dropsite, considering one literally did just that. Alastor Rushal, the Raven is a member who joined the Night Lords sometime after the massacre. Dark Angels also suffer from being written by Gav Thorpe, one of the most middle of the road authors in the setting. So, I don't really think you can say they're better in this case. Especially, when they clearly aren't.

Black Templars on the other hand are crusaders not Arthurian-knights. Big difference in themes and I don't think we should squat an entire chapter just because one of the Lion's cubs feel inadequate. Besides, Black Templar characters are just much
more grounded and well written than the Unforgiven are.

Even Gav Thorpe (the worst writer BL currently has) acknowledges the DA do regular SM stuff when they're not doing THE HUNT, though.

There is no short answer to this question, but the simplest answer is that for 99% of the time (and for 80%+ of the Chapter’s members) the Dark Angels are as much an Emperor-serving, xenos-slaying, mutant-loathing, witch-burning Chapter as the next one (or the Ultramarines). If you want an example of this, amongst many fine stories, you might like to try The Purging of Kadillus. However, for 1% of the time (and for 20% of their members) they have their own agenda: the hunt for the Fallen.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
Personally, my biggest gripe with Black Templars is that they seem to be sharing an aesthetic niche with Dark Angels.

Dark Angels have gone through a couple of different themes to end up as knights - the old kits and images had them styled as monks and before that native americans.

From what book is that picture?

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:
From what book is that picture?

An expansion for the original Space Hulk called Deathwing and then published in a short story collection of the same name.