Black Templar Flavor Restored

[Schlitzaf]

Inspired by survey thread. I want a place we can write down actual and real UU we have lost over the years. The first is that

1) Biker Crusaders (Codex Armaggeddon)

-Reason it would help give us a more clear and identifiable aethestic alongside our Crusader Squads

2) Neophyte Ancient (Codex Black Templar)

-Was a special rarely used option for Helbrect command squad. It’s purpose similar to increase our aethestic variance from other power armor, could be another HQ choice.

3) Castallen Draco & Marshall Champion Almerich

-Simple unique characters to expand our roster

 

Now we have a few units I call 0.5 unique, they have been lost or basically usable as another model

1) Durandal Dreadnought (Ironclad)

-Ironclad is literally how I think a modern Durandal would be. Even down to Hurricane Bolter arm. But there could be arguments that a Durandal Dreadnought being a simple slot could take some other Templar gear to help unique

2) Assault Marine Load Out (Assault Marine)

-We still have these. What we lost was ability to take power weapons instead of Plasma or Flamers. Also universal Storm Shield. Giving us the ability to do that Power Weapon instead Plasma or Flamer option. Would be a simple addendum and give us a little something

3) Sword Brothern (Company Veterans)

-The main thing lost is our ability to have 10 men. But the squad itself, is very well represented by Company Veterans espacially with our Vigilus Detachement. So giving them back to 10 man would be a nice little change. What is vital is reemphasising CompVets are Sword Brothern and not Vang or Stern. Espacially not Vang. As Sword Brothern could do shooty*.

 

The second is Vows, having all save accept been recreated via Strategems. That one could simply be a 1-2CP strategem +1 to hit and/or additional attack. And finally is fearless in closs combat and passing morale than charging forward.

 

The former is hard, but a simple solution there would be increasing our leadership in close combat or near enemy models. And the latter we could do a reverse ork model. The more models we lose the higher our leadership goes. Finally chapter tactic fixing.

 

The basic change and unit additions noted above focus on unlike Angels or Puppies focus on our more basic line units. We suffer the most in that 1A Power Weapons suck. Additionally Strategems are nice for Vows but I want a feeling of inspiration based on Medj posted. Keeping our current tactic adding the following

 

BLACK TEMPLAR armed with Power Sword/Maul/Ax May attack an additional time with that weapon [if within 6” of a BLACK TEMPLAR CHArACTER].

 

Finally for what little it would matter I’d give all relavent units CHAMPION keyword. As we brainstorm remember certain aspect of C:BT like our sanctity v Reclusiarch were because we had an unupdated codex. The focus here is when the survey comes out we give them something tangible and a reason on the table top why a Templar army Would look and play different then other loyalist marines

 

*admittedly because unit was copy and pasted version of SM Vets

[Medjugorje]

in my view,... these little changes would make it okay (far away from perfect). The key is, to write GeDub again, again and again.

AND not just the 4-5 guys here in the forum. Lead the other BT-players you know to that too.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I think it should just be +1 attack on the charge across the board.

 

Was Amalrich actually given a datasheet? I know Draco had one in White Dwarf, but I never really understood how Draco came about as a thing. If they went to so much effort to produce him why wasn't he in the codex? He only came out a few months after.

[Schlitzaf]

Adel +1 attack on charge wouldn’t fix the core issue of 1A Power Swords being bad. The goal of this rule is fixing that. And secondly it would have to be “+1 attack when charged/charge/heroic intervened”

 

The point is fixing that. And second Castallen Draco was literally Castallen with the set wargear of Power and combiMelta.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Yeah, but it does fix the issue that 2A Chainswords are also bad, and is more balanced, I think your idea is a little OP, as it gives the benefit at all times, (and why does it need to affect HI? There are no single attack characters.)

 

Also, Draco has a boltgun, not a combi-melta.

[Medjugorje]

the old captain in third edition (which was shown as a black templar) hs a power axe and a combi melta. Castellan Draco just have a Power Sword and a Mastercrafted Bolter.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

That captain model was a bit random actually. Mine came with a storm bolter.

[Schlitzaf]

Yeah, but it does fix the issue that 2A Chainswords are also bad, and is more balanced, I think your idea is a little OP, as it gives the benefit at all times, (and why does it need to affect HI? There are no single attack characters.)

 

Also, Draco has a boltgun, not a combi-melta.

Because all chapter tactics that used to be on charge are charge/charged/HI

[Sword Brother Adelard]

But we don't need the extra attack on the HI, and thematically it's cooler to buff charges, we shouldn't be the ones being charged!

[Sete]

So far I loved righteous zeal 7th edition.

Gain extra attacks if we lost or suffered a wound charging or being charged.

That with re roll charges would pe perfect.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I think I'd prefer one of the other charge buff mechanics. The more reliable ones...

 

I miss falling forwards.

[Brother Tyler]

I think it should just be +1 attack on the charge across the board.

Was Amalrich actually given a datasheet? I know Draco had one in White Dwarf, but I never really understood how Draco came about as a thing. If they went to so much effort to produce him why wasn't he in the codex? He only came out a few months after.

The "Castellan Draco" model was a limited edition miniature. The miniature that was used to represent Draco in the web-based rules was:

I don't know that Amalrich ever had official rules or an official mini. If there were rules, I suspect that they (GW) simply used some existing mini or a conversion (much the way the old 2nd edition Terminator Captain was used to represent various characters such as Invictus and Agemman). I'm too lazy to go digging through boxes in my garage to find out.

The challenge with named characters is that GW won't give things rules unless there is a corresponding model. A redux of Castellan Draco sounds to me like something GW would do as a Black Templars Primaris "Lieutenant" (yes, we all know he's a Castellan). I'm not sure the downgrade to Primaris Lieutenant would be received favorably by many Black Templars fans (even though having a proper Black Templarizied Primaris would be nice).

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I have him on my painting desk as it happens. He's the only Templar Character not finished. (I have messed with him a bit though, giving him a Chainsword and jetpack so he can be the Blender Marshal, also, the sword is a bit odd in person.

I'd be pleased with a Primaris Castellan Draco however, like how the Ultramarines have Calsius named.

[rendingon1+]

What is Durandal dreadnought?

[bolvar]

A dreadnought variant, from 3rd or 4th edition. It was very similar to a BA furioso dreadnought, but most important, the first dreadnought we had with 2 ccw

[Canadian_F_H]

Bro-ty. I dont think making him a lieutenant would actually be a downgrade since I recall it being said explicitly that black templars actually call their lieutenant's "Castellans". So it could actually work.

[Schlitzaf]

So the thing about +1 attack on charge is one it’s too much of a “Khorne” thing. Part of this thread is too pushing too deliberately emphasizing or pushing mechanically areas were we could diverge from other power armored armies.

 

And frankly +1 attack on 1 damage power weapons isn’t really overpowered. It just makes it so that +4 points you are spending is a straight buff. Versus this weird cost analysis.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

A little while ago I sent in an e-mail to GW, having seen the thread in this forum about letting them know that there are still BT willing to spend money.

 

Two of the many things I mentioned that I'd like to see are a BT specific character dreadnought, and the return of Draco.

 

Draco as a named BT Lieutenant would be very good for us. Give him his custom sword, artificer armor, and cybernetic rules. He might be a little more survivable an melee than a normal Lieutenant, and a good edition to put with Helbrecht or Grimaldus while they're granting rerolls.

 

We have two or three named Dreadnoughts in BT lore. I think it'd be great to get rules and a model for one, so that I can swap out my generic Chaplain Dread for a specific BT option. Bonus points if it's an Ironclad character with a sculpt calling back to the Durandal.

 

In fact, if we add in those, as well as an update to crusaders (maybe let them take combat shields instead of pistols?), crusader bike squads, the actual Durandal dread as an option instead of Ironclads with a Venerable Durandal for more points, Crusader Primaris, and a couple other tweaks. Well, we almost have enough to warrent our own codex.

 

Some rules I could see us having in a codex are:

 

Change 'They Shall Know No Fear' to 'No Pity! No Remorse! No Fear!: Whenever a BT unit fails a morale check, they do not lose any models. Instead, roll 2d6 and move the unit a number of inches toward the nearest enemy unit equal to the result. (Possibly changed to 'the enemy unit that removed the most models'. The wording isn't perfect, but it's a better rule for BT, and has its down sides. No rerolls means you will fail easier, and that might cause your gun line to charge out of cover.)

 

Updated Abhor the Witch: As long as our army is battle forged, and every detachment is black Templars, each black templar unit can abhor the witch for free on a 4+, and spend 1 CP for a single BT unit to deny on a 2+. Only one unit per psychic attempt, obviously. (This might make up for the absolutely awful lack of psychers. There is no good way to cheese one in if all detachments are BT, so I don't think it'd be bad to give us good deny. Especially with us not having relics or characters for it like Khorne.)

 

A strategem that allows the contents of a BT vehicle to disembark after it moves for X amount of CP.

 

A strategem that allows each model in a unit to make extra attacks in the fight phase equal to the number of models slain that turn (this is stolen from custodes and might be too strong on crusader squads, but they are limited to chainswords and 2 power weapons. I'd say test it before deciding, but for enough CP I think it'd be fine. BT become the Imperial bloodletter bomb if you anger them without killing them, which makes them function kind of like a 30 man squad of ork boys. People would want to kill them all and leave none left.)

 

...

 

I have other ideas, but these are the directions my thoughts have been going. I think if the community were to get together and draft a good set of tested rules, we could get some real weight behind a possible change.

 

(editted to add: The 'extra attacks' stratagem could be restricted to Sword Brothers/vets only to balance it, and the strategem for disembarking could be called Assault Ramps, and only work on Rhinos and LR Crusaders, to keep turn one charges out of stormravens from becoming a problem. The only other potentially problematic issue is the updated Abhor the Witch, and honestly, I don't see an issue with a 50 percent chance to deny for free. It isn't like we get the smites and psychic teleporting of Grey Knights, and BT should be good at what they're theme says they're good at. Charging up into your face and hating your magic out of existance.)