Codex Supplement: Black Templars & New Ancient

[Kilamandaros]

 

 

Leaked review of the codex (seems legit but take with some salt as he doesn't seem that familiar with the current rules and is only showing the current stat blocks as a comparison so could be making mistakes on what has changed).

 

If accurate then the transport detachment looks great and very thematic, definitely my pick of the 3

[zarkkarn]

Latest warcom article has a tease of more models, what do we think this is? Something bt exclusive or just assault termies on the horizon?

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/expqztky/black-templars-painted-by-a-hand-that-designed-them-the-emperor-approves/

 

Quote

Now that they are done, I can move on to our next batch of new miniatures – a great big box of [REDACTED]. They’ll definitely give [REDACTED] fans a piece of [REACTED] for the next [REDACTED]. I hope you’re looking forward to it!

 

Edited Saturday at 03:19 AM by Brother Tyler
Changed quoted text from black to default color for theme for readability

[redmapa]

Theres always gonna be new miniaures so I wouldnt read too much on it beyond it being a cheeky joke about upcoming projects.

[Marshal Reinhard]

15 minutes ago, zarkkarn said:

Latest warcom article has a tease of more models, what do we think this is? Something bt exclusive or just assault termies on the horizon?

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/expqztky/black-templars-painted-by-a-hand-that-designed-them-the-emperor-approves/

 

 

The one redacted followed immediately by "fans" throws everything it could be for a loop. If it were a real sentence he said which then had the words redacted (as opposed to just a gimmicky sentence constructed with redacteds at the outset), it would presumably not be for BT fans, as he would change gears and mention a completely different group than what he had hitherto been discussing.

[Lord Nord in Gravis Armour]

Now that they are done, I can move on to our next batch of new miniatures – a great big box of [PLASTICIZED CRACK]. They’ll definitely give [ADDICTED] fans a piece of [FOMO / ENVY / BUYER'S REMORSE] for the next [FISCAL QUARTER]. 

 

You're welcome.

[HeadlessCross]

The supposed leaked rules are very whelming. 

[Blindhamster]

They look pretty good to me tbh

[Orange Knight]

Plenty from the book looks good to me. I don't think we should pass judgement until we've seen everything in action. 

I'm impressed with how thematic some of the detachments and rules are. I'm hoping GW improve how armies reflect the lore going forward. 

[Emperor Ming]

Templars are bottomish, so I would have been expecting decent point drops and decent buffs rather than sidegrades

[DemonGSides]

They pulled a lot of power out of named heroes which is always a positive in my opinion.

[Mmmmm Napalm]

I'm happy the sword brethren datasheet represents the fiction once again, with no squad leader in the form of a castellan. 

 

Unfortunately, the neophytes' shotguns and boltguns are still classified as "neophyte firearms." GW's insistence on the stupid "has to be included in the box or it's not a wargear option" being taken to the extreme of invalidating  an option included in an upgrade kit made just 4 years ago...

Edited Saturday at 04:23 PM by Mmmmm Napalm

[redmapa]

16 hours ago, Emperor Ming said:

Templars are bottomish, so I would have been expecting decent point drops and decent buffs rather than sidegrades

 

Thats the history for this faction, sidegrades and fun is all you can expect. Personally Im quite happy with the rules, they seem very fun and thematic, it definitely opens up a lot of new list ideas and I cant wait to test them.

[HeadlessCross]

20 hours ago, Blindhamster said:

They look pretty good to me tbh

In what sense? The Ancient based detachment is frankly laughable and the Transport detachment is a worse version of what other armies received. 

 

You MIGHT use the Chappy one (and with the army rule change, the Grotmas detachment is at least now interesting), but this gonna be the same scenario as Dark Angels where you basically take a couple of your specific units (AKA Sword Brethren instead of Deathwing Knights) and play Gladius or Stormlance. 

[Antarius]

Or, hear me out, you might actually want to play the army because of what it is, rather than what people on the internet pretend is optimally efficient.

Army rules aren't supposed to be merely a delivery system for maximum damage output (or whatever the current meta says is the new hotness), they're also supposed to convey a certain character and atmosphere.

I mean, if I basically just wanted to do a lot of Excel sheets, I could get a job doing that.

[jimbo1701]

I actually don’t really mind how strong the  detachments are or not. As long as I can hurl 60+ marines and a couple of vehicles up the table in the emperors name and know that it suits the style of the army I’m happy. 

[HeadlessCross]

13 hours ago, Antarius said:

Or, hear me out, you might actually want to play the army because of what it is, rather than what people on the internet pretend is optimally efficient.

Army rules aren't supposed to be merely a delivery system for maximum damage output (or whatever the current meta says is the new hotness), they're also supposed to convey a certain character and atmosphere.

I mean, if I basically just wanted to do a lot of Excel sheets, I could get a job doing that.

And somehow the supplement actually delivers that vs the base detachments?

[Antarius]

Yeah, that's the general idea 

I mean, the whole point of space marine codex supplements is that you have an army that can (and does) operate like a space marine army, but with some key deviations. The rules are supposed to reflect that, not necessarily provide a more "optimal" detachment than all the already existing detachments. So if you don't want to use the supplement and the detachments it brings, you can just not use it and play a regular space marine army. If you do want to use it, you can even pick and choose the units and detachments that you prefer.

For example, I've always found that tactical marines were an essential part to a space marine army, so back in the day when I played Blood Angels, I always took some tacticals, even though I could have taken assault marines instead - not because it's somehow "better", but because it was my personal preference that fitted my vision of a Blood Angels army. This doesn't make me some kind of hero for taking a (nominally) "suboptimal" choice, it just makes me someone who has a certain idea about what I want in my army and like having the option to do so.

At the end of the day, whether or not a given detachment is "better" than the detachments in the main codex is somewhat beside the point of codex supplements. If detachments were only supposed to be about being "best", there wouldn't be any reason to have more than one, as people would only ever use the "optimal" one anyway. In the real world, things work somewhat differently, of course.

[Evil Eye]

4 hours ago, Antarius said:

Yeah, that's the general idea 

I mean, the whole point of space marine codex supplements is that you have an army that can (and does) operate like a space marine army, but with some key deviations. The rules are supposed to reflect that, not necessarily provide a more "optimal" detachment than all the already existing detachments. So if you don't want to use the supplement and the detachments it brings, you can just not use it and play a regular space marine army. If you do want to use it, you can even pick and choose the units and detachments that you prefer.

For example, I've always found that tactical marines were an essential part to a space marine army, so back in the day when I played Blood Angels, I always took some tacticals, even though I could have taken assault marines instead - not because it's somehow "better", but because it was my personal preference that fitted my vision of a Blood Angels army. This doesn't make me some kind of hero for taking a (nominally) "suboptimal" choice, it just makes me someone who has a certain idea about what I want in my army and like having the option to do so.

At the end of the day, whether or not a given detachment is "better" than the detachments in the main codex is somewhat beside the point of codex supplements. If detachments were only supposed to be about being "best", there wouldn't be any reason to have more than one, as people would only ever use the "optimal" one anyway. In the real world, things work somewhat differently, of course.

This is the way. Reminds me of the FAQ for the 3.5E Chaos book, published in Chapter Approved 2004; it explicitly states that the option to swap vehicle heavy bolters for sonic blasters is entirely for flavour, as they give no actual advantage over heavy bolters in game terms.

[HeadlessCross]

8 hours ago, Antarius said:

Yeah, that's the general idea 
 

Well your general idea is legit wrong, because the supplement doesn't accomplish that goal just like how the Dark Angels one fails at the goal. 

[Antarius]

Okay, then.

[Kilamandaros]

On 7/28/2025 at 4:37 PM, HeadlessCross said:

Well your general idea is legit wrong, because the supplement doesn't accomplish that goal just like how the Dark Angels one fails at the goal. 

 

Terrible take. It's a great, thematic codex that fits the army well. Yes it's a sidegrade as we lost some rules but gained a lot too. You sound like someone who just likes to complain about nothing.

[HeadlessCross]

4 hours ago, Kilamandaros said:

 

Terrible take. It's a great, thematic codex that fits the army well. Yes it's a sidegrade as we lost some rules but gained a lot too. You sound like someone who just likes to complain about nothing.

No, I simply think it's not a good supplement just like the Dark Angels one.

 

The "rules" gained are a couple units you run in the main codex detachments (Yeah, Sword Brethren are still good, woohoo?). The detachments aren't good (yeah, jumping through hoops to get -1 to wound with an Ancient is SO thematic? Getting yet another transport detachment but worse than the last few codices to get one?), the two new characters are either redundant (the Chaplain but not) or really bad (LOL Ancient), and they clearly skipped over consistency (Other units with token-esque models don't take up more space in transports, but Grimaldus still hasn't beem fixed).

 

I'm not going to pretend this supplement is breaking ground or even thematic. Theme only works when it works on the table. 

[Sir Clausel]

But there is a detachment that lets all reroll advance and charge. That fits our theme pretty well and fits well with the new Execrator that lets you advance and charge. 

And a detachment focused on charging from transports and specificly Land Raiders? They even gave us better rules for the Land Raider Crusader? All fit our theme on the table top. 

 

Maybe we wont win any tournaments with our detachments but a codex is not "good" based sorely on being just the most powerful one. 

 

Thematic and fun rules also contributes to it being a good codex. 

Power comes and goes every 3 month with every dataslate. 

 

But you are probably just gonna be mad about theme and power either way.

[DemonGSides]

Some of the gripes are legit (Grimaldus' retinue being probably the biggest "Why does this work this way here but nowhere else?") but overall I think both the BT and the GK codexes both seem flavorful and fun, especially in the crusade stuff.