Alternative rules for Black Templars in WH40k 8th Edition

[Dosjetka]

Note: I've updated the ruleset to v1.1 as of 20th April 2020. If your version is an earlier version, please download the latest using the link below.

 

Hello all!

 

In case you hadn't noticed, I've done some work on updating the rules for Black Templars in 4th Edition to our current 8th Edition and compiled them all into an easy-to-use two-page document that you can find here. The idea is to use them in place of the rules you can find on page 44 of Psychic Awakening: Faith and Fury (i.e. Knights of Sigismund, The Lost Librarius). I've also rewritten the lore snippet that precedes the effect description of the Chosen Champion rule.

 

Please note that I tried to change the original rules as little as I could; the intent was simply to update them to make them compatible with Warhammer 40'000 8th Edition and not to make them more/less powerful.

 

Anyway, I hope some of you find use for these rules in your friendly games!

 

Comments and constructive criticism are, of course, appreciated.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Dosjetka

[Medjugorje]

I like the idea very much. But in terms of 8th edition it does not fit anymore.

 

for righteous zeal:

in last editions you were forced to make a moral test in each phase - thats a huge difference. It would make more sense that each unit with suffered casaulties in the shooting or psychic phase can charge instead - but that would make them extremly powerful and other armies have to pay lots of CPs - so this should cost something.  So reroll charges is a good and the charge should cost one CP.

 

Kill them could be a thing.

[ThirtySixNights]

How can you fail a leadership test with space marines even with a -1 modifier?- re: Kill them all.

 

I appreciate trying to keep them as up to date as possible, but worth checking this sort of thing as there are other examples like this 

[Medjugorje]

morale test like it used to be.. two dice have to be equal or lesser then the 8 (for normal marines)

[ThirtySixNights]

morale test like it used to be.. two dice have to be equal or lesser then the 8 (for normal marines)

I played in 4th, I know how it used to work. But it doesn't say roll 2d6 it says take a leadership test, and in 8th that's 1d6 Just something he should modify if he wants others to be able to use the rules in 8th Ed, or even for clarity.

 

But it shouldn't be 2d6 leadership since marine leadership has been nerfed. Average leadership was around 9 for marine squads in 4th, and most commanders had 10. You could adjust for this by making it a roll of 2+, which isn't close but it's as close as you can make it simply.

 

 

One other thing to note is that the +1 strength on suffer not the unclean has been mitigated with a -1 to hit instead of the initiative penalty. Which sort of makes sense but also, makes no sense. Mathematically you perform exactly the same against toughness 4,5 and 8 units but you perform worse against everything else, so it's just a straight up nerf. Since -1 initiative in 4th meant you still got to strike at the same time as a lot of enemies and faster than some (like tau for example) where that extra strength made a huge difference against their battlesuits.

 

I might suggest that it should be striking last. Really makes our warlord traits and litanies for striking first actually useful. Good synergies.

[Dosjetka]

I like the idea very much. But in terms of 8th edition it does not fit anymore.

 

for righteous zeal:

in last editions you were forced to make a moral test in each phase - thats a huge difference. It would make more sense that each unit with suffered casaulties in the shooting or psychic phase can charge instead - but that would make them extremly powerful and other armies have to pay lots of CPs - so this should cost something.  So reroll charges is a good and the charge should cost one CP.

 

Kill them could be a thing.

You used to take Morale tests at the end of each phase but the old rule specifies that it applied only for losses taken during the Shooting phase. With that in mind and given how Morale works in 8th, I think my solution works well enough without changing the rule too much and/or giving it a very powerful effect that it didn't previously have.

 

How can you fail a leadership test with space marines even with a -1 modifier?- re: Kill them all.

 

I appreciate trying to keep them as up to date as possible, but worth checking this sort of thing as there are other examples like this 

You're completely right; that's an embarassing mistake. I've changed it and have updated the file to v1.1. I'd appreciate if you'd let me know about it's current wording.

 

However...

 

 

morale test like it used to be.. two dice have to be equal or lesser then the 8 (for normal marines)

I played in 4th, I know how it used to work. But it doesn't say roll 2d6 it says take a leadership test, and in 8th that's 1d6 Just something he should modify if he wants others to be able to use the rules in 8th Ed, or even for clarity.

 

But it shouldn't be 2d6 leadership since marine leadership has been nerfed. Average leadership was around 9 for marine squads in 4th, and most commanders had 10. You could adjust for this by making it a roll of 2+, which isn't close but it's as close as you can make it simply.

Marine Leadership has been nerfed compared to what it was back in 4th (Initiates then had Ld 8 vs Ld 7 today, Sword Brethren have gone from 9 to 8) though remember in 8th you can use a Chaplain's Ld of 9 if you're within 6" of it which was not the case back in 4th.

Taking all of this into account:

• A Crusader Squad without a Sword Brother has 58.33% chances of success which I'll admit is low; that said this kind of scenario is rare since the upgrade to a Sword Brother is free and I'd wager the vast majority of players take it.
• A Crusader Squad with a Sword Brother has a 72.22% chance of success; this is the usual minimum score and Sword Brethren Squads will have the same result which honestly isn't so bad.
• A Crusader Squad with a Chaplain within 6" has an 83.33% chance of success; this is less common but definitely a good result.

Note that you can increase your units' Ld by taking a Primaris/Company Ancient. With all of that in mind, I don't think a +2 modifier to the score is necessary.

 

One other thing to note is that the +1 strength on suffer not the unclean has been mitigated with a -1 to hit instead of the initiative penalty. Which sort of makes sense but also, makes no sense. Mathematically you perform exactly the same against toughness 4,5 and 8 units but you perform worse against everything else, so it's just a straight up nerf. Since -1 initiative in 4th meant you still got to strike at the same time as a lot of enemies and faster than some (like tau for example) where that extra strength made a huge difference against their battlesuits.

I might suggest that it should be striking last. Really makes our warlord traits and litanies for striking first actually useful. Good synergies.

You're right; I misread the rule and thought it was a -1 to hit. Your suggestion is a good one and has been implemented. Let me know what you think of the wording.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Dosjetka

[ThirtySixNights]

Marine Leadership has been nerfed compared to what it was back in 4th (Initiates then had Ld 8 vs Ld 7 today, Sword Brethren have gone from 9 to 8) though remember in 8th you can use a Chaplain's Ld of 9 if you're within 6" of it which was not the case back in 4th.

Taking all of this into account:

 

• A Crusader Squad without a Sword Brother has 58.33% chances of success which I'll admit is low; that said this kind of scenario is rare since the upgrade to a Sword Brother is free and I'd wager the vast majority of players take it.
• A Crusader Squad with a Sword Brother has a 72.22% chance of success; this is the usual minimum score and Sword Brethren Squads will have the same result which honestly isn't so bad.
• A Crusader Squad with a Chaplain within 6" has an 83.33% chance of success; this is less common but definitely a good result.

Note that you can increase your units' Ld by taking a Primaris/Company Ancient. With all of that in mind, I don't think a +2 modifier to the score is necessary.

I'm glad you liked my suggestions and thanks for posting that mathhammer. Always enjoyable. I did the same thing when I made my suggestion, and it was for the roll to be a flat 2up roll, not a +2 modifier.

 

A 2+ roll has a 83% or so chance of passing, which was about the average going rate for a space marine leadership will back in 4th. Definitely the way you've implemented is fine, it's just a little less powerful.

 

Combined with the power creep you've seen across 40k in general. I can see these rules being much more substantial and fluffy in a full GW codex release!

 

In the meantime I do like this rendition and clearly some effort has gone into it! Kudos.

Edited April 20, 2020 by ThirtySixNights

[Medjugorje]

Anyway - I think your intentions are so great - REALLY. but the game had a very big arm race since 4th edition - your rules are too weak. The current Black Templar rules are way stronger then your rules and they are one of the weakest Space Marines if not the weakest. In this case its more important to see the intention of the rules in this time. After things have gone like rules like initiative its so much important for an melee army to get the charges to fight first for example. So you have to rethink your rules more. Suffer not the unclean could be just a buff and the only restriction (instead of -1 Initiative) could be that "interrupting" a fight in the opponents fight phase is forbidden to use by this vow. 

The effect of cover for example used to have minor effects on normal weapons in 4th editon and so the benefit of cover is so much better in this edition - if you loose it, the rewards should be so much better.

 

 

most rules in would be more like a nerf or have no effect

 

Rightoues Zeal should be like it was in the 3rd or 4th edition. I mean it should help to come into melee, for each wound suffered in overwatch the unit should get +1" for the charge move for example. Thats balanced and very close to the originally sense of this rule. But like before - the current rule is much better in terms of balancing. The game is faster then it used to be in older editions so the effect should be stronger.

 

Uphold the honor has the same problem. It could be a "ignore -1 AP" ability.

 

Suffer not the unclean would be a nerf  in this edition. you could use the ability of the Stratagem (the current rules in 8th edition for suffer not the unclean to live) because -1 to hit but rerolling to wound is not that bad 

Edited April 20, 2020 by Medjugorje

[ThirtySixNights]

Yeah they aren't strong but.. It's custom, fluffy rules. How competitive it is really doesn't matter I think. I'll certainly try them out.

 

Though uphold the honour vow is insanely strong, and always was an auto take back in the day. I think I'll enjoy using it.

[Medjugorje]

in 5th editon Accept any challenge was the "vow to go". And in this case its the same... 

(btw - i changed my examples in the spoilers)...

[Dosjetka]

ThirtySixNights: ah, gotcha. While your solution of a 2+ roll on a D6 is an elegant one, I think mine is closer to the original rule and, in addition, gives some value to Ld modifiers such as the Chaplain and Ancient which is always nice in an edition where Ld/Morale count for almost nothing in many of cases. It also adds a bit more granularity to the test which I personally enjoy. Anyway, thank you for your suggestion and your feedback in general, I do appreciate it. :tu:

 

Medjugorje:I'd like to clarify, if it wasn't already clear, that the rules in the supplement fully replace only two of the current rules Templars have:

• Knights of Sigismund
• The Lost Librarium

While I understand that Knights of Sigismund has potency as a rule, I do think the number of extra rules proposed here both outweigh its potency and add a 4th Edition Black Templars "feel" to an army. While this might not be everyone's cup of tea, it scratches an itch that I've had for a while and shows people that, in a non-competitive setting, you can tweak rules to make your Black Templars feel more like what they were back in the day.

On top of that, I wanted to port the 4th Edition rules over to 8th changing as little as possible. Again, that may not be everyone's cup of tea but I think that the rules as they are in their updated state are far from bad especially when combined with the Chapter Trait, Warlord Traits, Relics, Litanies, and Stratagems that we already have in 8th Edition.

 

Now, to address your suggestions (which, make no mistake, I do appreciate and will analyse attentively):

• +1" on the charge per Overwatch casualty: potent and does fit the 4th Edition rule/intent. I'll keep this in my notes and see if I can playtest it a bit as I want to avoid it being overly-potent (could perhaps be limited to a maximum bonus of x inches).
• Ignore AP of -1 instead of 6+ inv. save: again, potent change and could fit with the original intent. Perhaps overly potent if combined with the previous? Needs some testing, I think.
• Suffer not the Unclean: I'll need to check and compare the Stratagem with the rule I have updated. In any case, please note that adding a nerf to the rules is not necessarily a bad thing if it reinforces the 4th Edition "feel"; that is the main intent behind these alternative rules.

Anyway, I'm away from my computer for the day so I'll let your suggestions do the rounds in my mind and get back to you later in the week. I'll also see if anyone else has any similar/different suggestions. In any case, thank you for taking the time to contribute to this project. :tu:

[ThirtySixNights]

in 5th editon Accept any challenge was the "vow to go". And in this case its the same...

(btw - i changed my examples in the spoilers)...

Yeah that's what I meant to say haha

[Medjugorje]

my fault. I thought you want this rules instead. So I think its very nice and the balancing is no problem. 

You could send that to GW to show them how Black Templar players see their army. 

 

BTW... the rules in the first part should be working for a "Detachment" instead of an army.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Medjugorje

[Sete]

I like the rules and I second Medj suggestion.

[Medjugorje]

Did you play with them already?

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Fighting last is so incredibly bad. While I do think we should have gotten a vows system to apply army wide rules, these are really showing their age. I can't see more than the anti-psycher one getting used.

 

Really, most of what we'd want has been done mechanically by other armies in Sigmar or 40K at this point, and it'd be best to update them using those mechanics as a template. For example, the Sigmar Ironjaws 'Mad As Hell' rule for advancing under fire.

[Medjugorje]

 

Really, most of what we'd want has been done mechanically by other armies in Sigmar or 40K at this point, and it'd be best to update them using those mechanics as a template. For example, the Sigmar Ironjaws 'Mad As Hell' rule for advancing under fire.

- charge in the opponent phase (Custodes)

- plus one to hit (Space Wolves)

- extra movement in the beginning like the abhor the witch rule, destroy the witch rule (Alpha Legion / Raven Guard

- gain CPs by dead enemy characters (Space Wolves)

- kill them all / shooting twice... (Chaos Space Marines)

 

I know how pissed I was when I saw the Space Wolves Chapter tactic which I wanted to have absolutly for our Black Knights.

[Dosjetka]

Fighting last is so incredibly bad.

Do you have any suggestion as to what we could update the old "-1 Initiative" rule instead of "fight last" or "-1 to hit"? The advantage with "fight last" is there is a litany that counteracts that effect. The bad thing is you almost have to use the litany which is not good design and will result in people not taking that vow.

BTW... the rules in the first part should be working for a "Detachment" instead of an army.

I copy/paste'd the wording from Faith & Fury so it should be correct. Which part are you referring to?

[Medjugorje]

if its just replace Knights of Sigismund then it makes sense that we dont get the additional rules if we fight with another allies.

[Schlitzaf]

Honestly why would they have negative effects? That is a mechanic went way of dodo. I think said this elsewhere.

 

EChampion: Litanies, maybe 1 Special, and 1 Choose a Litany. Or 2 Choose a Litany. 6” Base HI. Warlord Trait: Mandatory Master Swordsman

 

Port Vigilus Rules & Associated Keywords as Part of BT Rules w/o CP Tax. Master Swordsman replace the Mortal Wound on Charge WT.

 

AcceptChallenge Vow 0CP Strat. BT CHAMPION kills a Monster or Character get 2CP

 

Biker Crusader Squads

 

Initaites in Crusader Squads repointed (12ppm)*

 

Option for any model that could take a Flamer to take a Power Weapon instead

 

CVets taken as BTemplars are 2-10 Man

 

*Potentially update to pair combatants, retain current wording but Neophytes may attack an additional time instead of rerolling 1’s. Make ability more relevant and less feelbad.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Negative effects have indeed sort of fallen out of the design space. You don't really see a lot of abilities that require you give your own army a negative to hit or charge penalty for X effect. In fact, aside from a few smatterings of mortal wounds gambits (chaos knights, ork super smite, etc) or plasma, the only effect that comes to mind without me researching is those Mechanicus robots that can choose to lose all movement in exchange for shooting twice. That's an absolutely huge gain in damage for a minor to moderate loss in maneuverability, but the player chooses when to do it, and the unit itself is designed to be a stationary fire platform if you set them up with that ability.

[Medjugorje]

but to keep the balance its okay to get nerfs and gain some really cool rules that are not there at the moment. Rules which used to be typically Templar-like to gain reroll to hit in close combat for example. I miss that rule so much - i would take 2 penalty rules to gain this one. And this negative effects fit perfect because Templar shouldnt be a shooty army  - they should be on the same level like Blood Angels if they take the vow accept any challenge.