Black Templars lore question

[Huggtand]

(Sorry in advance for a long post)

 

In another thread this comment made me want to read about the Black Templar again. I love the old lore so any excuse to read up a bit again is a good one 

 

 

"No, earlier edition BT have been explicitly some of the last remnants in the Imperium that remembered the Imperial Truth, sharing that with probably only the primarchs, the Custodes and the deep records of Mars. That was a huge and unique part of their identity - that despite the whole "religious crusader window dressing" they were ostensibly atheist of the "the Emperor is but a MAN" (The post has since been deleted so I don´t write the username)

 

 

I don´t really remember that picture but since I have not read much of the BT background since their WD Index Astartes article, I got curios and had a look in the books I have at home.

 

 

First up is Codex Armageddon, 3rd Edition (2000)

Not much in this one; Sigismund takes command of the BT and to prove his loyalty to big E, began the greatest crusade in the history of the Imperium. They have no home worldbut are fleet based. In their special rules can see some description of their overall traits.

- They have a Righteous Zeal (they are really angry and advance instead of falling back)

- Unique BT squad (they don´t conform to the codex astartes)

- Conviction that big E will save them (they don´t take cover)

- They don´t like unclean people or witches or warlocks (bonuses to hurt those people)

Not a lot of fluff here but here is the core of the BT is shaping up.

 

Next up is the Index Astartes II (2003)

Here the BT is a little more fleshed out; Sigismund is chosen to lead the BT for his fervent faith in big E and his undying devotion to humanity. The BT faith is described as fanatical even rabid in their lust to crush the enemies of mankind. In the Index their uniqueness is that they have been crusading for 10.000 year to prove trier loyalty, their difference from the codex organization and the Emperors champion. They are fanatical in their zeal to stomp on the mutant, heretic and psykers and will mercilessly wipe out populations of worlds to expunge the sin of heresy.

- So here we have a more complete description of the BT. There is no mention that they are religious but that is not unique since practically all chapters sees big E not as a god but the ultimate human. There is no mention of them upholding the Imperial Truth in any special way either.

 

Codex Black Templars, 4th Edition (2005)

Now the BT gets a lot of fluff and I will try and sum it up as best as i can

In the introduction it is repeated that Sigismund is chosen as the Emperors champion for his fervent faith in big E and his undying devotion to humanity. To prove their loyalty the start the longest crusade in the history of the Imperium. The warriors that became the BT is seeking to follow his example. They have no tolerance for heretics, mutants, warlocks, aliens or any other abominations against big E and are utterly ruthless against anything perceived as a threat to the Emperor. The BT is described to be super righteous, fanatical and furious.

There are some more religious loaded words in the codex like; sacred revulsion at the foe; the holy bolter as divine instrument of big E; the embodiment of the sacred flesh of the Emperor; holy relics. But as a hole the BT is not portrayed as a religious chapter or that they have a religious appearance, their singular faith is for their duty. No mention in the codex that they, in contrast to other chapters, follows the old Imperial truth.

- In summary the first BT codex paint the same picture as the index two years earlier. The fluff is vastly expanded but the unique traits of the BT have stayed the same.

 

Dataslate Reclusiam Command Squad (2013)

Here the special BT reclusiam command squad, High Hand of the Emperor, is described fervent prayers to the Emperor and his sacred word. 

- A shift to a more religious leaning? 

 

Codex Space Marines, 7th Edition (2015)

Just a brief description that they have always fought to uphold the honor of the Emperor, and of Dorn and that they are a fleet based crusading chapter.

The new unique thing about the BT is "the Black Templars’ absolute conviction, in contrast to all other Space Marine Chapters, that the Emperor is a god".

- Nothing to contradict the old picture except that the religious bit is brand new thing (or at least from 2013).

 

Codex Space Marines, 7th Edition (2017)

In the new codex there is a very short picture of the BT. They are a fleet based crusading chapter. As pious champions of the Emperor, their fanatical devotion has driven them to deliver righteous retribution against every traitor, alien and daemonic abomination they have faced in battle. The BT faith in the God-E is consider fanatical. Face-to-face with his enemy, a Black Templar can fight with the noblest ideals of honor, earning glory and respect as he ensures that each of his foes is truly vanquished.

- Here is in my opinion the biggest departure from the previous lore that focused on the BT as fanatical (angry) marines that utterly zealous hated all enemies of big E. Before there was no ideals of honor, just of ruthless stomping on the foes. There is also more focus om the religious nature of their faith.

 

 

So in summary I must say that I can´t find any description of the BT as "some of the last remnants in the Imperium that remembered the Imperial Truth, sharing that with probably only the primarchs, the Custodes and the deep records of Mars". 

Neither is the Black Templars more "ostensibly atheist" than any other chapter in the older lore.

Lastly, I don´t see that BT had any "religious crusader window dressing". They seems to go from a non religious chapter, as any else, to super religious in 7th Edition. Maybe there is a point to make that the term crusading evokes the religious crusaders in our own time but that´s not supported in their background.

 

- Have I misses something important?

As you can see above I do not have any novels with the BT, and perhaps they give a different picture?

 

 

Personally I must say that I liked the older BT lore better than the new one, but fictitious religious nut-jobs can also be fun so I absolutely see that the new BT can appeal to many people also.

 

(Above is of course just my personal opinions and should be taken in that spirit )

[bolvar]

In short, our fluff was changed from being absolut Imperial Truth defenders (something stated even by Reclusiarch Grimaldus himself on Armaggedon if I recall correctly) to the other extreme , being almost the lone chapter that regards the Emperor as a god. Also, while almost all other chapters don't commune at all with the ecclesiachy and their ways (and manners, also spelled ravings), working with them only because they are part of the Imperium and when necessary, we have pretty good relationship with them and often cooperate with them.

 

 

Special mention about our hatred to witches: until 4th edition codex, we hated psykers above almost everything. Our astropaths and navigators were previously taken by the Inquisition and made repent of their condition (just imagine it: witches taken and PURIFIED by the INQUISITION, amongst other forces in the Imperium, not being apt for us until they :cussING REPENT FOR BEING WHAT THEY ARE).

We couldn't even ally ourselves with other forces that included psykers, with the sole exception of grey knights and inquisitors. This being portrayed into RPG games, for example the deathwatch RPG, where black templars have to overcome tests in order to not launch themselves against fellow deathwatch psykers from other chapters.

 

Then, that was changed too into the following: we still hate with passion enemy psykers, but now we have in high steem astropaths and navigators with the excuse that they are "connected" to the Emperor. Also zero issues with working with allied non-grey knights or psyker inquisitors.

 

 

If you ask me, I feel that our fluff was demolished for no reason, as part of the watering down workline the grimdark aspect of 40k into softdark. And yes, I'm pretty mad for this sudden and no justified changes in our lore, with the next step being the introduction of primaris marines that just can't fit into our organization as chapter. More watering down us in order to erase the differences between marines (damn it, what Cawl did makes lesser heresies child's play by comparison, we have genocided entire systems and exterminatus'd them for less).

 

 

Pardon if you find this somewhat ennerved, but that's how I feel this. Hope at least it helps you, and of course welcome to these halls.

[CommodusXIII]

Wow, a Black Templars lore question I can actually contribute to!

The Black Templars were first mentioned in the 2nd Edition Codex: Ultramarines in the section regarding Codex-compliant Chapters:

 

 

That was about it until 3rd Edition rolled around.  The first glimpses of what the Black Templars would become was not in the lore, but in the artwork on the cover of the Big Black Book:

 

 

The lore truly began with Codex: Space Marines.  The only mention of the Black Templars is in the entry regarding the Emperor's Champion, where it describes the Black Templars as "gathering together in prayer to the Emperor".

 

You've already mentioned Codex: Armageddon, so I won't rehash that.

 

Index Astartes II, which you summarized above, is actually a compilation of White Dwarf articles. The one on the Black Templars was originally published in September of 2000 (issue 249 in the UK, 248 in the US).  This was published only two months after Codex: Armageddon, and served to flesh out the lore of the Black Templars while the Codex focused on the rules.  This was about par for the course - back in 3rd Edition, the Codices were relatively light on lore while White Dwarf and the Black Library did the heavy lifting in fleshing out the universe.  In this case, Codex: Armageddon and the Index Astartes article together were the first in-depth lore of the Black Templars themselves.

 

So, other than an implication during 2nd Edition, Black Templars lore has always been one of fervent belief in the Imperial Creed, not the Imperial Truth.  I'd be glad to read any sources that state otherwise - I'm a sucker for old lore.

[Firepower]

 

Nope.  Not again.  You can't make me!

[shandwen]

The biggest issue with BT lore is that of head-cannon. People have ran with what has been given, and what amounts to minor changes in lore details what the general community has decided it should be.

[Mmmmm Napalm]

Going to be honest here I don't mind BT being religious whatsoever. I prefer it, in fact. It doesn't overwrite their other characteristics.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I think you're more right than a lot of people would like to admit.

 

The change has been that the belief in the creed has become more explicit as time has progressed, whereas before it was implicit. A lot of the text of the codex is more religious than it would be if they didn't believe in a higher power.

 

The problem is Helsreach in a way, well, Blood and Fire. Where Grimaldus explicitly says the Emperor is not a God. It's the only real jarring note in the progression you describe.

[Medjugorje]

Going to be honest here I don't mind BT being religious whatsoever. I prefer it, in fact. It doesn't overwrite their other characteristics.

 

For me its the same thing... But GeDub destroyed that in another form. While in a story of 4th edition codex there had been a story which is about a Dark Eldar Raid and when the Black Templars arrived to help out the imperial people another Eldar fraction (Craftworlds) still fought against them... the Black Templars decided to obliterate both.

In newer fluff - they allied two times with the eldar (Cadia and in Mars Triology) + Iron Warriors in the Beast series.

 

Black Templars hated Psyker so much that they cant fight with them despite they used to be in the ranks of brother chapters. Now - Black Templars gene seed defect are the reason...(come on GW)

 

 

That hurts me a lot. And then this alleged size-cut which Guy Haley posted about 2014 in his blog that Templars are not over ~6000 Marines just about 1500... . Then in a few articles GeDub sometimes write that BT could be a huge chapter and sometimes they represents them as a codex complied chapter. That implies me  they are (GeDub) not sure and dont care for Black Templars anymore. They are just focussed into first founding chapters (so stupid) because they saw how much attention the Horus Heresy got. 

 

This + the fact that so much marines used to be there with special rules back in 6th edition, they decided to reduce Black Templars into black Ultramarines in terms of gameplay and this flow slowly goes into their mind so Black Templars got irrelevant for GeDub in terms of fluff AND gameplay. Look how bad the rules are written after codex BT 4th edition( start with their humilation into codex space marines in 6th edition) / no special faction in a game...

 

We will see what "New GW" will do and if "New GW" is really "new GW"

[CommodusXIII]

No offense, but I don't see what any of that has to do with the Black Templars history of being "faithful" versus "truthful".

 

 

The biggest issue with BT lore is that of head-cannon. People have ran with what has been given, and what amounts to minor changes in lore details what the general community has decided it should be.

 

That's why I always try to cite sources (if not specific passages) when talking about lore.  

[MyD4rkPassenger]

For me anyways, it has always been Grimaldus' explicit words contradicting the imperial creed that put me in the camp that their fervor was not religious but one of duty to put mankind above all else and follow the example the Emperor set before them.  They were at the spear-tip of the ideals of humanity, and the purity of humanity, above all others.  

 

I think now it is an unfortunate retcon that I don't agree with at all.  It waters down the templars from post human "others" that are meant to protect and disassociate from humans so as to protect them, and not to believe in false truths, to perpetuators of a faith that went directly in the face of the Emperor.   If it wasn't an intentional retcon, it seems more of a mistake that the codex writers and Guy Haley forgot that little tidbit of lore.  The fact that the writers continue to ignore Helsreach as a source of chapter dogma and background makes me think it is the former rather than the latter.

 

As an edit, I came into the chapter with Helsreach, therefore I took that and the 4th ed codex both as how the chapter acted.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

 

 

Black Templars hated Psyker so much that they cant fight with them despite they used to be in the ranks of brother chapters. Now - Black Templars gene seed defect are the reason...(come on GW)

 

What are you on about? The only gene seed defects we have are the Betcher's Glad and the Sus-An Membrane, there is nothing about a gene-seed defect being linked to psychic powers, where are you getting that from? (also, there is not such Eldar story in the 4th Ed Codex.)

 

And them fighting alongside Iron Warriors and Eldar makes perfect sense in the context in which both those things happened. Magneric didn't really want to fight alongside Calcator, but if he didn't, the Orks would massacre them all, (and then he wouldn't get to kill Calcator himself,) it made sense because the Orks were the greater threat and Calcator and Magneric could still remember the fact they were once good friends.

Cadia makes sense as well, again, the Black Legion were the greater threat.

 

The size-cut retcon was itself retconned. So that's not an issue anymore, we're back in force again. GW have also always had us down as non-codex compliant, (except for like, second edition) what they sometimes get wrong is the terminology, which is probably because not all of their writers have the same obsessive knowledge of the lore as the fans. (E.g. saying we have a 'Company' on Vigilus, when we actually only fave 'Fighting Companies'

 

And how can you say we aren't favoured or don't have special rules? Look at Vigilus, we got awesome special rules when several first founding chapters who are represented on Vigilus didn't. (Look at the Iron Hands for example, those poor souls.)

 

You have a lot of beef Medj, with things which just aren't true?

 

If anything, the changes over the years have added depth to our character which makes logical sense, we're no longer these chainsword weilding angry charactures, who have these absolute rules which make no sense. The no psyker ally rule makes no sense in the fluff because we are all sons of Dorn, and all the rest of the Chapters have Librarians, if that rule was still a thing, we would have no Last Wall protocol.

 

It also struggled with things like the Navigators and Astropaths. Even on those topics, more recent fluff has seen a return to the past, but with more nuance, for example, in one of the early TBA books, (I think the first one with Beaumont, where I am pretty sure he was just a Marshal, not the High Marshal?) The Abhorrence's chief astropath makes his way onto the bridge, and Beaumont is proper livid about him even being in his presence, let alone daring to speak to him in person, but the Astropath has important news which cannot wait, but is still terrified. This is far better than the over-reverent treatment given to the chief Astropath of the Eternal Crusader in the book of the same name.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

For me anyways, it has always been Grimaldus' explicit words contradicting the imperial creed that put me in the camp that their fervor was not religious but one of duty to put mankind above all else and follow the example the Emperor set before them.  They were at the spear-tip of the ideals of humanity, and the purity of humanity, above all others.  

 

I think now it is an unfortunate retcon that I don't agree with at all.  It waters down the templars from post human "others" that are meant to protect and disassociate from humans so as to protect them, and not to believe in false truths, to perpetuators of a faith that went directly in the face of the Emperor.   If it wasn't an intentional retcon, it seems more of a mistake that the codex writers and Guy Haley forgot that little tidbit of lore.  The fact that the writers continue to ignore Helsreach as a source of chapter dogma and background makes me think it is the former rather than the latter.

 

I disagree. I think it is very deliberate, read The Beast Arises, it is a big plot point that the BTs worship the Emperor, it is talked about as an open secret by the other chapters, and both Koorland and Vulkan make it very clear that they do not like it. Furthermore, when Marshal Magneric attacks the Orks in front of the Iron Warriors, the Ork Wyrdboy's warp attacks falter in the presence of the Templars prayers, enabling Magneric to kill him and in turn the whole Waaaagh.

[MyD4rkPassenger]

 

For me anyways, it has always been Grimaldus' explicit words contradicting the imperial creed that put me in the camp that their fervor was not religious but one of duty to put mankind above all else and follow the example the Emperor set before them.  They were at the spear-tip of the ideals of humanity, and the purity of humanity, above all others.  

 

I think now it is an unfortunate retcon that I don't agree with at all.  It waters down the templars from post human "others" that are meant to protect and disassociate from humans so as to protect them, and not to believe in false truths, to perpetuators of a faith that went directly in the face of the Emperor.   If it wasn't an intentional retcon, it seems more of a mistake that the codex writers and Guy Haley forgot that little tidbit of lore.  The fact that the writers continue to ignore Helsreach as a source of chapter dogma and background makes me think it is the former rather than the latter.

 

I disagree. I think it is very deliberate, read The Beast Arises, it is a big plot point that the BTs worship the Emperor, it is talked about as an open secret by the other chapters, and both Koorland and Vulkan make it very clear that they do not like it. Furthermore, when Marshal Magneric attacks the Orks in front of the Iron Warriors, the Ork Wyrdboy's warp attacks falter in the presence of the Templars prayers, enabling Magneric to kill him and in turn the whole Waaaagh.

 

That definitely falls within the new lore I was discussing, as Helsreach and the 4th ed book came before.  Most of the changes I believe people have become split on came just after they were rolled back into the mainline C: SM, which the Beast Arises series came after.  It may have always been the mistake of the writers to make the faith somewhat ambiguous before now, but the seed had been planted on both sides of the fence and now one has been put forward while the other wasn't, some people will never agree on it now.  Wherever the lore itself goes I'll still happily play and support the chapter.

[CommodusXIII]

For me anyways, it has always been Grimaldus' explicit words contradicting the imperial creed that put me in the camp that their fervor was not religious but one of duty to put mankind above all else and follow the example the Emperor set before them.  They were at the spear-tip of the ideals of humanity, and the purity of humanity, above all others.  

 

I think now it is an unfortunate retcon that I don't agree with at all.  It waters down the templars from post human "others" that are meant to protect and disassociate from humans so as to protect them, and not to believe in false truths, to perpetuators of a faith that went directly in the face of the Emperor.   If it wasn't an intentional retcon, it seems more of a mistake that the codex writers and Guy Haley forgot that little tidbit of lore.  The fact that the writers continue to ignore Helsreach as a source of chapter dogma and background makes me think it is the former rather than the latter.

 

As an edit, I came into the chapter with Helsreach, therefore I took that and the 4th ed codex both as how the chapter acted.

 

Helsreach is the only direct source I could find for "atheistic Black Templars", so it's something of an outlier in the lore.  Either it's an individual departure by ADB from the rest of the GW lore writers, or Grimaldus was just an aberration (at least, prior to his experiences on Armageddon).

[MyD4rkPassenger]

 

For me anyways, it has always been Grimaldus' explicit words contradicting the imperial creed that put me in the camp that their fervor was not religious but one of duty to put mankind above all else and follow the example the Emperor set before them.  They were at the spear-tip of the ideals of humanity, and the purity of humanity, above all others.  

 

I think now it is an unfortunate retcon that I don't agree with at all.  It waters down the templars from post human "others" that are meant to protect and disassociate from humans so as to protect them, and not to believe in false truths, to perpetuators of a faith that went directly in the face of the Emperor.   If it wasn't an intentional retcon, it seems more of a mistake that the codex writers and Guy Haley forgot that little tidbit of lore.  The fact that the writers continue to ignore Helsreach as a source of chapter dogma and background makes me think it is the former rather than the latter.

 

As an edit, I came into the chapter with Helsreach, therefore I took that and the 4th ed codex both as how the chapter acted.

 

Helsreach is the only direct source I could find for "atheistic Black Templars", so it's something of an outlier in the lore.  Either it's an individual departure by ADB from the rest of the GW lore writers, or Grimaldus was just an aberration (at least, prior to his experiences on Armageddon).

 

That certainly can be the case, because I too have futilely only been able to cite Helsreach for that.  If it was ADB's stylistic choice, it's a hard one to shake for me anyway, as that was how I was introduced to them as a whole.  At the end of the day, it's cool by me however people head-cannon their crusade as long as people keep the chapter alive on the table!

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I agree, I have not found a single other source which is explicit that the Templars do not believe in the Emperor as a God. All of the early sources were either silent or implicit on the issue. WD249 skirts around it, and the Codex talks a lot about faith and zeal and belief, but doesn't ever really explain what it is they believe in.

The thing with Blood and Fire is the emotional weight which the community attaches to Helsreach, (and a lot of people read them together in the bundle.) which means it stands out so much more in the memory of most people, jarring against the later, more explicitly religious fluff.

For my money, this may link in to the theory that the narrator in the codexes is perhaps pushing an agenda or omitting things. Perhaps the in universe authors of the books did not know they worshipped the Emperor as a god, or did know and were deliberately omitting it. It's similar to the way that the official truth about the Vinculus Crusade is different from the actual truth, which Grimalus recounts in Blood and Fire to the Celestial Lions.

[MyD4rkPassenger]

Oh I definitely think the lore is being written with different viewpoints in mind.  I think it allows all of us to have the wiggle room to have slightly differing views on what exactly happens, especially between armies.  I can't tell you how many times the DA player I know and I jokingly argue about exactly what happened with Cypher.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Oh I definitely think the lore is being written with different viewpoints in mind.  I think it allows all of us to have the wiggle room to have slightly differing views on what exactly happens, especially between armies.  I can't tell you how many times the DA player I know and I jokingly argue about exactly what happened with Cypher.

 

I also think it allows different writers to make small mistakes and get away with it. The 'Company' on Vigilus being a prime example:

 

Explanation 1: The 'in universe' writer doesn't know that BTs don't have pure 'companies' because it's not their job to know the idiosyncracies of every individual SM chapter,

Explanation 2: The GW writer who wrote the force deployment section didn't know that technically BT Companies are named 'fighting companies'. and we should cut them some slack.

 

Also, just to play Devil's advocate:

 

Explanation 3: GW are completely retconning us again and we should all panic and cast them down from on high in fire and brimstone.

[Gederas]

 

 

Black Templars hated Psyker so much that they cant fight with them despite they used to be in the ranks of brother chapters. Now - Black Templars gene seed defect are the reason...(come on GW)

 

What are you on about? The only gene seed defects we have are the Betcher's Glad and the Sus-An Membrane, there is nothing about a gene-seed defect being linked to psychic powers, where are you getting that from? (also, there is not such Eldar story in the 4th Ed Codex.)

 

And them fighting alongside Iron Warriors and Eldar makes perfect sense in the context in which both those things happened. Magneric didn't really want to fight alongside Calcator, but if he didn't, the Orks would massacre them all, (and then he wouldn't get to kill Calcator himself,) it made sense because the Orks were the greater threat and Calcator and Magneric could still remember the fact they were once good friends.

Cadia makes sense as well, again, the Black Legion were the greater threat.

 

The size-cut retcon was itself retconned. So that's not an issue anymore, we're back in force again. GW have also always had us down as non-codex compliant, (except for like, second edition) what they sometimes get wrong is the terminology, which is probably because not all of their writers have the same obsessive knowledge of the lore as the fans. (E.g. saying we have a 'Company' on Vigilus, when we actually only fave 'Fighting Companies'

 

And how can you say we aren't favoured or don't have special rules? Look at Vigilus, we got awesome special rules when several first founding chapters who are represented on Vigilus didn't. (Look at the Iron Hands for example, those poor souls.)

 

You have a lot of beef Medj, with things which just aren't true?

 

If anything, the changes over the years have added depth to our character which makes logical sense, we're no longer these chainsword weilding angry charactures, who have these absolute rules which make no sense. The no psyker ally rule makes no sense in the fluff because we are all sons of Dorn, and all the rest of the Chapters have Librarians, if that rule was still a thing, we would have no Last Wall protocol.

 

It also struggled with things like the Navigators and Astropaths. Even on those topics, more recent fluff has seen a return to the past, but with more nuance, for example, in one of the early TBA books, (I think the first one with Beaumont, where I am pretty sure he was just a Marshal, not the High Marshal?) The Abhorrence's chief astropath makes his way onto the bridge, and Beaumont is proper livid about him even being in his presence, let alone daring to speak to him in person, but the Astropath has important news which cannot wait, but is still terrified. This is far better than the over-reverent treatment given to the chief Astropath of the Eternal Crusader in the book of the same name.

Re Librarians: The second paragraph of "Abhor the Witch" in the 8th Edition Space Marines codex states it's an in-universe theory that the reason for the Black Templars lack of Librarians is their gene-seed has somehow deteriorated.

 

As to the retcon for their reverence of Astropaths and Navigators: Of all the retcons, that's one that makes the most sense. If Black Templars hated ALL psykers, as a chapter they couldn't work because they'd be trying to murder their Navigators, as the way some (of the most loud) BT fans think the Templars react to ALL psykers is "stab, shoot, burn".

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Ah, my bad, I retract that one Medj.

[bolvar]

 

 

 

Black Templars hated Psyker so much that they cant fight with them despite they used to be in the ranks of brother chapters. Now - Black Templars gene seed defect are the reason...(come on GW)

 

What are you on about? The only gene seed defects we have are the Betcher's Glad and the Sus-An Membrane, there is nothing about a gene-seed defect being linked to psychic powers, where are you getting that from? (also, there is not such Eldar story in the 4th Ed Codex.)

 

And them fighting alongside Iron Warriors and Eldar makes perfect sense in the context in which both those things happened. Magneric didn't really want to fight alongside Calcator, but if he didn't, the Orks would massacre them all, (and then he wouldn't get to kill Calcator himself,) it made sense because the Orks were the greater threat and Calcator and Magneric could still remember the fact they were once good friends.

Cadia makes sense as well, again, the Black Legion were the greater threat.

 

The size-cut retcon was itself retconned. So that's not an issue anymore, we're back in force again. GW have also always had us down as non-codex compliant, (except for like, second edition) what they sometimes get wrong is the terminology, which is probably because not all of their writers have the same obsessive knowledge of the lore as the fans. (E.g. saying we have a 'Company' on Vigilus, when we actually only fave 'Fighting Companies'

 

And how can you say we aren't favoured or don't have special rules? Look at Vigilus, we got awesome special rules when several first founding chapters who are represented on Vigilus didn't. (Look at the Iron Hands for example, those poor souls.)

 

You have a lot of beef Medj, with things which just aren't true?

 

If anything, the changes over the years have added depth to our character which makes logical sense, we're no longer these chainsword weilding angry charactures, who have these absolute rules which make no sense. The no psyker ally rule makes no sense in the fluff because we are all sons of Dorn, and all the rest of the Chapters have Librarians, if that rule was still a thing, we would have no Last Wall protocol.

 

It also struggled with things like the Navigators and Astropaths. Even on those topics, more recent fluff has seen a return to the past, but with more nuance, for example, in one of the early TBA books, (I think the first one with Beaumont, where I am pretty sure he was just a Marshal, not the High Marshal?) The Abhorrence's chief astropath makes his way onto the bridge, and Beaumont is proper livid about him even being in his presence, let alone daring to speak to him in person, but the Astropath has important news which cannot wait, but is still terrified. This is far better than the over-reverent treatment given to the chief Astropath of the Eternal Crusader in the book of the same name.

Re Librarians: The second paragraph of "Abhor the Witch" in the 8th Edition Space Marines codex states it's an in-universe theory that the reason for the Black Templars lack of Librarians is their gene-seed has somehow deteriorated.

 

As to the retcon for their reverence of Astropaths and Navigators: Of all the retcons, that's one that makes the most sense. If Black Templars hated ALL psykers, as a chapter they couldn't work because they'd be trying to murder their Navigators, as the way some (of the most loud) BT fans think the Templars react to ALL psykers is "stab, shoot, burn".

 

 

You should read our 4th edition codex. It's pretty clear, let me quote directly from the book:

 

Page 8:

"[...] Exactly how these Crusades communicate with each other is uncertain, though it is speculated that the Black Templars make use of such Navigators and Astropaths as have been sanctified by other organisations and are repentant of the curse of psychic powers. [...]

 

Clear as crystal.

 

 

That's why we can say that the recent changes regarding non enemy psykers are the opposite of what we were. Going from using something as essential for a fleet based chapter as navigators and astropaths that are made repentant by other imperial organisations, to actually REVERE them. Again, a quote:

 

Page 172 of my 6th edition SM codex -digital edition- copy pasted:

 

ABHOR THE WITCH

Outsiders mistakenly interpret the lack of Librarians within the ranks of the Black Templars Chapter, and the fury with which its battle-brothers slay Chaos Sorcerers, as

an intolerance of all psykers. This could hardly be further from the truth, for the Black Templars hold special reverence for Astropaths, seeing them as holy disciples who have

actually communed with the Emperor. Navigators are similarly honoured, for their psychic blessing allows them to see the divine light of the Astronomican and guide the

Black Templars through the Warp to deliver righteous retribution against the Emperor’s enemies.

 

 

Our lore was twisted 180º for no reason, I hope this point is clear.

 

 

And now: of course we have to suffer astropaths and navigators, because without them we couldn't crusade properly. But one thing is using something that you abhor because you have no other choice, and another entirely matter is that you REVERE what you are suppose to be hating.

 

And of course we don't want any battle brother to be a filthy witch, we abhor them remember? That's why you examine exhaustively every possible neophyte, to be completely sure that none of them carries such vile "gift"

[Sword Brother Adelard]

i take your points, I forgot the reference to the lost librarius 'theories' in the current codex, (I acknowledged this error above and I apologise for that,) mainly because I dismissed them as being untrue. I don't think our lack of a Librarius was caused by something as simple as a mere gene-seed deficiency - one which is not shared by any of the other successor chapters, nor the Imperial Fists themselves, which is notable because the Imperial Fists were themselves partially reconsituted from our own number, after our own Librarius was lost - Nor do I think the lack of psykers was caused by an incident like The Howling, because that happened in M34, because we don't have Librarians in TBA, which was in M31.

Although I take your points, I disagree with your metaphor. The fluff on how we treat astropaths and Navigators, is more like a pendulum, it swung one way in 4th edition, where we revile them both with a hatred bordering on the ridiculous, and then another to The Eternal Crusader where we bowed at the feet of the chief Astropath. (which was also, ridiculous)

 

The pendulum has most recently swung back to somewhere closer to the original point, such as in TBA again, where Beaumont is so angry about the Astropath being on the bridge of the Abhorrence.

I know the Codexes are important, but they don't provide the whole picture, they fit into the unreliable narrator aspect. (The Abhor the Witch box is in fact a prime example of the unreliable narrator aspect, because the answer given in the box, is clearly not an answer.)

Personally, I like the mystery of the Lost Librarius far more than the simple 'we hate psykers' fluff in 4th edition, it's much more interesting to theorise about why we don't have Librarians, when we apparently started the Eternal Crusade with them. Did their brethren kill them as their faith in the God Emperor took hold? Did they succumb to a terrible curse? Did we seal them in the Librarius and they perished within? We just don't know. I bet even the Black Library authors don't know, it's like what happened to the 2nd and 11th Legions, it's a mystery with no answer, and I love that!

 

I have another theory about latent psykers, but I've covered that elsewhere, and it isn't very popular, so I won't repeat it here. (PM me if you want to know.)

 

I guess my point is, the fluff has developed so far since 2002, and I think, on the whole, for the better precisely because it is less clear cut.

[Medjugorje]

 

For me anyways, it has always been Grimaldus' explicit words contradicting the imperial creed that put me in the camp that their fervor was not religious but one of duty to put mankind above all else and follow the example the Emperor set before them. They were at the spear-tip of the ideals of humanity, and the purity of humanity, above all others.

 

I think now it is an unfortunate retcon that I don't agree with at all. It waters down the templars from post human "others" that are meant to protect and disassociate from humans so as to protect them, and not to believe in false truths, to perpetuators of a faith that went directly in the face of the Emperor. If it wasn't an intentional retcon, it seems more of a mistake that the codex writers and Guy Haley forgot that little tidbit of lore. The fact that the writers continue to ignore Helsreach as a source of chapter dogma and background makes me think it is the former rather than the latter.

 

As an edit, I came into the chapter with Helsreach, therefore I took that and the 4th ed codex both as how the chapter acted.

Helsreach is the only direct source I could find for "atheistic Black Templars", so it's something of an outlier in the lore. Either it's an individual departure by ADB from the rest of the GW lore writers, or Grimaldus was just an aberration (at least, prior to his experiences on Armageddon).

 

That certainly can be the case, because I too have futilely only been able to cite Helsreach for that. If it was ADB's stylistic choice, it's a hard one to shake for me anyway, as that was how I was introduced to them as a whole. At the end of the day, it's cool by me however people head-cannon their crusade as long as people keep the chapter alive on the table!

 

 

thats the point... I love the new lore as I loved the old one. There are minor changes that fit better or, like I said before, used to fit better. My whole problem is the playstyle on the table. It doesnt represent where I see them.

 

 

 

Oh I definitely think the lore is being written with different viewpoints in mind. I think it allows all of us to have the wiggle room to have slightly differing views on what exactly happens, especially between armies. I can't tell you how many times the DA player I know and I jokingly argue about exactly what happened with Cypher.

I also think it allows different writers to make small mistakes and get away with it. The 'Company' on Vigilus being a prime example:

 

Explanation 1: The 'in universe' writer doesn't know that BTs don't have pure 'companies' because it's not their job to know the idiosyncracies of every individual SM chapter,

Explanation 2: The GW writer who wrote the force deployment section didn't know that technically BT Companies are named 'fighting companies'. and we should cut them some slack.

 

Also, just to play Devil's advocate:

 

Explanation 3: GW are completely retconning us again and we should all panic and cast them down from on high in fire and brimstone.

 

 

The question is why will that happen???

 

Maybe because GeDub dont care about. Do you know how much mistakes happened about other lore? For me its the overal picture that makes me angry about GeDub. Thats why we are the only sub-forum there are so much negativity ( even though Iron Hands are suffering hard on the table )

 

Ah, my bad, I retract that one Medj.

 

You know what I mean. Even if this theory wouldnt be the truth. Now the BT are very different towards Codex 4th edition fluff.

 

 

I have another theory about latent psykers, but I've covered that elsewhere, and it isn't very popular, so I won't repeat it here. (PM me if you want to know.)

 

 

I like the idea of the youtuber "40k-theories"

[Agamemnon_Ilias]

I'm struggeling with the new fluff, namely the crimes Guy Haley commited against our chapter. Some of it directly contradicts major parts of our lore (Overall strength of the chapter was already disputed here, but I like to point out: It was 'corrected' in the index, not in the final codex. There is no mention of our overall strength).

The background for the Black Templars is so rich and we've been reduced to babbling idiots, who are shouting "praise be!" more times than the smurfs the word "smurf", as new iconic catch-phrase from an author, who hadn't got our battle-cry right in several tries (hint for Guy: No Mercy! is a German Pop-Band from the mid-nineties, not part of the Black Tempalr-lore). TBA tops everything: A crusading chapter is unable to secure its spacecrafts against boarding, one of the top 2-strategies of Warhammer 40K void combat, because they have only offensive capabilities... sure thing...

The Black Templars were suddenly recruited from the secretly religious brothers of the Imperial Fist chapter, which makes us to loyal Word Bearers and a perfectionist like Dorn allowed a major part of his legion to become religious and was suddenly fine with it, after he broke with Sigismund before, because Sigismund confessed he refused the Retaliation-mission, because of Euphrati Keeler's visions...

All in all, the actual fluff is one-dimensional and purely focused on the Imperial Creed, which is disappointing for me. Of course, this is just my personal point of view and it is ok, if people are actually happier with the actual lore, but in my opinion the Black Tempalrs have suffered, on the tabletop (rule-wise) and in general (lore-wise). They'll always be my first Warhammer 40K army and they'll always be my main army, but at the moment I'm rather dissapointed by the developments.

 

 

 

Aaron_Dembski-Bowden

I feel… distant. On one hand, I think Guy Haley dealt with it well, and he’s the consummate professional with this stuff. Whether he loves something or hates something, you’ll never know. He turns his book in, the book is great, and that’s that. He doesn’t dissolve into 8 months of crippling doubt, rewrites, and back-and-forths with other loreheads like I do.

It’s not that I dislike that specific change, exactly. I don’t think it’s bad, it’s just not a difference I personally enjoy. And that’s not me being diplomatic. I genuinely don’t think it’s worse or better, it’s just a difference I don’t want to write about. Yet? I might feel different if inspiration strikes.

I also have the advantage of being in all those conversations (and, more rarely, meetings) where important IP people have drilled into my skull “There is no one true 40K, there’s just the way you look at the lore through your own lenses”. So, to me, it’s one of those things, if you get me? If I wrote about the Templars, they’d probably? hopefully? still be more like the classic Templars, because of 40K’s stance on loose canon.

Part of my “Hmm, not for me, thanks” is that I feel like it’s such a sea change, and it crosses the boundary of what the Templars are to me, in some respects. At least insofar as I’ve always understood them. The Space Marines are inherently autonomous, not feeding upon Imperial culture, or even part of it, unless they choose to be, and literally deciding their level of involvement with the institutions of the Adeptus Terra. It strikes me as cool, but not really my flavour, for the Templars to adhere to the precepts of the Ecclesiarchy. Or even align with their beliefs, really. As much as 40K is about ignorance, and as much as everyone is some degree of wrong/in the dark/ignorant, the Templars already had their own thing without needing to stick that closely to the historical Templar, uh, template. Like, their beliefs are pretty much the least historically interesting thing about various knightly orders, so having it define the Templars in 40K isn’t for me.

Again, I don’t think it’s bad. (I’d say if I did.) It’s just not my flavour.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer/comments/7igatt/im_aaron_dembskibowden_ask_me_anything/

[Sete]

It wasn't Guy Haley that changed our lore.

It was 6th edition codex.