Jump to content

Black Templar Faction Focus


Recommended Posts

Looks like it will be an excellent edition for Templars! Only shame is that there is still an obvious pick for Vow, wish the others were on the same level.

 

Primaris Sword Brothers also look incredible, though seems unlikely every model will be allowed an MC power weapon - if they are then hallelujah! 

 

Full article

 

BT3.jpg

 

BT2.jpg

Edited by Kilamandaros
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its probably because a castellan or some sort is leading the unit like a sgt which get the mastercrafted one.

But it does look awesome! 3 wounds on the Sword bros and they can effectively have mastercrafted swords with their ability. Makes them better vs harder stuff and also better vs bigger weaker ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only worrying omission from the SB sheet is lightning claws - you'd at least expect them to get twin-linked for 2 even if their profile will be otherwise the same as a power weapon.

 

Also couldn't SB take a powerfist or was that just crusader squads?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brethren just was meant to be loyalist equivalent of chosen. But in 9th it suffered from codex power creep, chosen released one year later and had 1 more W and 1 more A at similar cost, which made brethren very awkward. 

 

Now brethren is treated equitably, 3W, combined power weapons profile, and upgrade options following the sprue content. These 3 features are exactly same with 9th chosen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was really hoping we would get faction rules instead of detachment rules (making vows our faction over Oom), but I guess it makes sense they did it this way. I noticed the detachment rule as shown on WarCom doesn't say we can't take psykers, even though WarCom themselves mentioned no taking psykers in our detachment, haha! I'm guessing it is just another error on their post for the rules, and the rule will be in the detachment when the index comes out. 

 

I'm glad sword brethren are looking really good. Able to choose how they attack depending on what they're fighting similar-ish to a character with a sweep/strike mode is really cool. Also, not having to model them all with swords (because of swords just being better than axes or mauls), is going to be great. Let's get some variety flowing!

 

Overall, I'm pretty happy with what is going on. Abhor the witch vow I think is going to be super useful against grey knights/1k sons, and maybe also psyker heavy tyranid and eldar lists. I really want to see the math for when it is better to take suffer not vs AAC, but uphold is still looking to be the one that will win us games. 

 

Things are going to be interesting for sure. Can't wait to see our strats and enhancements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Urkh said:

I was really hoping we would get faction rules instead of detachment rules (making vows our faction over Oom), but I guess it makes sense they did it this way. I noticed the detachment rule as shown on WarCom doesn't say we can't take psykers, even though WarCom themselves mentioned no taking psykers in our detachment, haha! I'm guessing it is just another error on their post for the rules, and the rule will be in the detachment when the index comes out. 

 

 

Oath is good, using oath will at least ensure us not fall behind other marines much. DA codex release in Q1 2024 will finally answer "how long we will using Oath", if they keep oath, then oath would be faction rules for the whole 10th. 

 

Vows keep some style, are flexible, and each vow has standard raw power of a typical 10th detachment rule. I have nothing to bother. 

 

About unit choice limits, both "no psyker" and "no librarian" could be possible and reasonable. Since there is no more deny step, can't introduce an allied psyker(e.g. inquisitor) has less disadvantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh by no means do I think OoM is bad. It reminds me a lot of the 4th codex Accept Any Challenge, where we got preferred enemy (everyone), giving us rerolls to hit against everything. I just feel it would be more flavorful for vows to have been the army rule vs OoM (which may have also changed how the vows work from the preview). If vows stay a detachment when the codex releases, then if we pick a different detachment, we wouldn't have vows, and that doesn't feel very black templarly, you know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so looking at today's Astartes index, Bladeguard master crafted swords are WS3+, whereas the sword brethren version above is WS2+

 

So I think that confirms what we thought; the master crafted profile here is for a Castellan, who presumably comes already in the squad instead of being added like other leaders (?) 

 

Bit odd, but I suppose we'll get proper confirmation soon enough 

Edited by Odd-ad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redmapa said:

Van Vets lost lighting Claws so it's quite possible SB have also lost that option, it's a bit weird as they are an option elsewhere but not for these units.

Good catch, I never even thought about that. 

 

Only potential caveat is that all of their weapons are called an "heirloom weapon", whereas SB have a thunder hammer separate. Bit weird to have one long-established weapon still be it's own thing but fold another into generic "power weapon" in the same unit. 

 

But honestly who really knows GWs thought process at this point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's everyone liking from the index?

 

For me LRCs & Stormravens look great for transport options, dropping Sword Brothers with a Judiciar & Bladeguard with Captain/Lieutenant on the enemy's doorstep will be glorious.

 

Drop pods with grav devastators looks good for anti-vehicle.

 

Loss of venerable dreads & regular dreads going to legends is painful but Ironclad remains at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im still looking at Terminarors and LRs, mechanized marines is gonna be really good imo and maybe putting some Assault Intercessors in a Raider to storm objectives.

 

I wanted to focus on Vanguard Vets and fast units but their change kind of bummed me, Im just gonna convert an Outrider into a Captain and just run two  blocks of 4 to go with my mechanized elite.

 

BGV are an interesting unit, it seems they can be very tanky so maybr them in a pod to be a nuisance on an objective could be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am surprised to see redemptor keep -1dmg and any other dreads lost it. 

 

Infiltrators still have "no DS in 12 inches" so no reason to not bring one or two squads.

 

Vindicator has a VERY powerful gun.

 

With enhancement, nameless captain(marshal) could make some punch in fight. But unless Helbrecht is very weak we won't have much chance to use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Emperor Ming said:

So previously BT had 5+inv, 5+ fnp vs mortals and cant be wounded on 2s,

 

Now that's essentially a 6+fnp if you select that option:ermm:

 

Hopefully I'm missing something cos that seems like quite the downgrade:ermm:

Every other subfaction abilities also carry less weight in 10th. Other players also can't get free advance charge or fight first by just say "I play this legion" too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Emperor Ming said:

So previously BT had 5+inv, 5+ fnp vs mortals and cant be wounded on 2s,

 

Now that's essentially a 6+fnp if you select that option:ermm:

 

Hopefully I'm missing something cos that seems like quite the downgrade:ermm:

 

You're also missing the second part of the new Uphold; Primarch-level leadership for the entire army. With battleshock and the way objectives work I don't think you're realising how powerful that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.