Black Templar: Flavor And Mechanical Identity

[Marshal Vespasian]

I am currently reading through the crusaders of Dorn compiliation from bl.

In the eternal Crusader it is expressed several times that BT dislike the static defending kind of warfare. They want to be continously advancing and despise the idea of defending something that Was already conquered on General principle. Because it means they are not pushing the Imperiums borders outwards. Its not "I dont like heavy bolters because raaaaargh chainswords" . It is more a manner of "if i am manning ramparts on a Planet conquered three thousand years ago and not crusading outwards, I have failed my calling, which is conquering New Lands". Which is an interesting point of view for a son of Dorn to take.

Edited September 4, 2019 by Marshal Vespasian

[Medjugorje]

 

I think aggressive, short to mid range elements are what makes a templar army a templar army.

From the primaris side of things assault boltrifles and agressors would fit that very well.

That being said, a bunch of guys with bolters and/or lascannons supporting your advancing CC elements just make sense tacticly speaking and the templars did use heavy weapons on armageddon for example. They didnt like it, but they understand the need to do so, even if it is against their nature, because they are zealots, yes, but not stupid.

 

I always try to build my lists around a number of melee equipped crusader squads and I like putting these in rhinos. Just because I love the idea of a mechanized force. I like to add dreadnoughts in, because I prefer those opticly to most of the marine tanks (aside from the sicaran and land raider but thats a matter of points costs).

 

This right here, is how BT to me come across. Sure BT like the epic close combat, but not complete nut cases who forgo ranged combat. If anything BT are closest to old aggressive legion front line battle tactics, over the more codex surgical strike style of modern space marines. I don't see how the heavy weapons guy is going to be having less enjoyment killing heretics than the chainsword guy honestly. In my head cannon, WB are the CSM version of BT zealots knights, except they are currently worse off rules wise than BT currently. 

 

 

in my mind they are a mix of Black Legion ( they have a Task, a Mission,... and they see themselves like the main force to do it)

a mix of Word Bearers - like you said - and World Eaters... zeal vs bersker rage...(both ways are like I have to ... I have to ... i have to)

 

[Link2edition]

I am currently reading through the crusaders of Dorn compiliation from bl.

In the eternal Crusader it is expressed several times that BT dislike the static defending kind of warfare. They want to be continously advancing and despise the idea of defending something that Was already conquered on General principle. Because it means they are not pushing the Imperiums borders outwards. Its not "I dont like heavy bolters because raaaaargh chainswords" . It is more a manner of "if i am manning ramparts on a Planet conquered three thousand years ago and not crusading outwards, I have failed my calling, which is conquering New Lands". Which is an interesting point of view for a son of Dorn to take.

I am going to add to this.

 

In Crusaders of Dorn there is a bit where sword brethren are about to charge into an ork stronghold. They are backed by a full crusade, but the sword brethren are the ones getting into CC, why? They are best suited for it in ways the other initiates are not, it is also their privilege to face the enemy in close combat as the higher ranking knights.

 

In the book, most initiates are on bolter duty to provide covering fire for their superiors, they don't LIKE being on bolter duty, but thats something the castellan needs them to do, so they do it. I love the way this portrays Black Templar devestator squads. "Alright initiates, I need you 4 to go stand over there and shoot lascannons at them while we close with the enemy." They deploy these units because they aren't stupid, not because they like it.

 

The book also has them using neophyte squads as a final step before a neophyte becomes an initiate. Their mentors are also on the battlefield watching from afar. The main character at this point in the book is a neophyte in a sniper squad and ends up charging the enemy and beating them to death with his sniper rifle.

 

At some point I will get my latest tourney list up but it reflects this mindset. The army starts with a bunch of neophyte squads and crusaders with bolters on the table. Initiates supervising their neophytes as they signal the drop. Then pods of sword brethren come in and close with the enemy.

 

 

As for individual actions, think of Black Templar like you would think of the DOOM Marine, specifically from DOOM 2016. He has a whole arsenal of heavy weapons, but he also revels in physically tearing deamons limb from limb with his own hands.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

I've never tied myself to a melee only list, but I do always include melee capability in my lists, and that is reflected in my tactics. It's rarely my plan to say, shoot a hoard of orks while retreating backward onto higher ground. Instead, I'm much more likely to put all guns into them while advancing, then charge in to break the hoard in melee after. Mechanically and fluff wise my Black Templar are, and should be, aggressive and relentless. 

 

I think the thing people get caught on is confusing basic savagery with hatred. It is very Black Templar to hate your foe above everything else. That's how our zeal works. It makes every fight a personal grudge match. We're not wild or untamed, and we don't lose ourselves to blood lust, but we hate our enemy. We exist to purge them above everything else, because for our chapter it is more important to punish evil than it is to protect the innocent. That is where our rep for ferocity comes from. We aren't doing our job by acting as the mighty pillars that hold a battle line together like the Fists would. We actively hate our foe, and desire to pursue them to the ends of the world to quench that burning hatred in blood. To be a Black Templar is to believe with complete and utter conviction that the foe standing before you not only shouldn't be there, but shouldn't have existed in the first place.

 

Anyway. My jabbering aside. In my mind, the BT would best be served by some sort of hated foe rule. BA get +1 wound on the charge, Wolves get +1 hit, and WE get +1 A. It's hard to figure out where another melee army could fit with the big 3 already taken in one form or another. Furthermore, something like a general FNP better fits the Iron Hands and their relentlessly tough nature. Perhaps a combination of 2 rules? Immunity to morale while in melee combat, and models killed in the fight phase are not removed until the end of the phase? We need rules to show that relentless hate that drives us forward. But I'm not quite sure how.

[Link2edition]

RIght now what we are good at is fighting in the assault phase as much as we fight in the shooting phase. Our charge reroll shenanigans mean we should really put melee weapons on anyone who can take them without sacrificing shooting. Stormbolter+power sword is the optimal loadout for templar IMHO. Shoot the enemy with everything you have, then charge them.  I don't care if its a devastator squad, give that leader a melee weapon.

We don't need to fuss with positioning for assault as much as lesser chapters do. Just shoot and see how many units you can get stuck in after the fact.

Use every tool at your disposal to crush the enemies of mankind, by bolter or blade, by lascannon or powerfist, just don't try to fight an 8th edition battle with a 4th edition list and call it flavor. We are a crusade of ad-hoc formations, we are not locked into a single strategy.

Edited September 4, 2019 by Link2edition

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I've probably made the most ridiculously expensive Devastator Sgt, Combi Grav and Power fist.

[Medjugorje]

wow ... how awesome would it be to get the Special rule from Obyron in assault doctrine ... just removed from the table after the fight Phase is over.

[Link2edition]

I've probably made the most ridiculously expensive Devastator Sgt, Combi Grav and Power fist.

All of mine are powersword + Combi Plasma

[SydonianDragoon404]

wow ... how awesome would it be to get the Special rule from Obyron in assault doctrine ... just removed from the table after the fight Phase is over.

My wishlist is assault doctrine making us cause mortal wounds in addition to normal damage on a 6 to wound with a melee weapon.

[Marshal Vespasian]

That would be awesome. Even just as a stratagem. A lrc full of crusaders would be on another level as a threat. Edited September 5, 2019 by Marshal Vespasian

[Link2edition]

Your historical summary is mostly accurate Mittermeier, but I think you've conflated Codex: Armageddon and Codex:BT in places. (Not that I think it matters, your arguments are very interesting, and I think your argument for why BT were so good in 3rd is spot on.)

 

The thing is Schlitz, you talk about never taking tactical squads, and taking MSU shooty Crusaders over devastators. But those are crunch things, not fluff things.

 

Let me elaborate, BT players in 3rd or 4th edition, couldn't take tactical squads, because we had Crusader Squads, Tacticals weren't in our army list. Now, we can take either data sheet, but, even if you took a tactical squad crunch wise, fluff wise it would still be a Crusader Squad. The datasheet doesn't change the fact that BT Battleline squads are called Crusader Squads, (even the Primaris ones if the image in the last two codexes is anything to go by.)

 

The question as to whether you would take a tactical squad over a crusader squad has been largely moot for ages however. You wouldn't. Crusader Squads were always better. They could take 5 man special/combi/heavy, tacs can't. They can have more flexible armaments that Tacticals, and can be larger. You can also take a CC weapon as a heavy weapon. They were just better. However, there is now one problem: Tactical squads are currently cheaper, and as we have seen since the new codex dropped, some players are choosing them, data sheet wise, for that very reason when all they want is ranged initiates. But, that doesn't stop that squad, fluff wise, being a Crusader Squad.

 

A different problem attaches to things like Scout Squads and Devastator Squads. Do we take them, when before we couldn't? I say yes. Fluff wise we've always had heavy weapon brothers. Crunch wise the player base invented the concept of the 'faux-devi' squad to compensate for their absence. It's almost laughably hypocritical to look down your nose at devastator squads, because 'BT don't like fighting at range' whilst loading up your backline with MSU 'faux-devi' squads.

 

(As an aside, I think my view on Devastator Squads may also stem from how long I had this army. I collected Black Templars BEFORE Codex:Armageddon and I was given a box of metal devastators as a present one birthday or Christmas, only to find when the Codex came out that I couldn't play them!) In fact, I'm painting one at this very moment. Because, I want to stick 4 grab cannons and a combi-grav in a drop pod and land it in my opponent's face. In line with your 'aggressive play' argument. I think that's pretty Black Templar!

 

Edit: I think an example is pretty useful here: Link2Edition's list contains no Crusader Squads for cost reason, has tacticals and Devastators, crunch wise it's not very BT. But the fact he dropped nearly all of them on turn one in the enemy's face and kicked arse? Now, THAT'S pretty Black Templar.

 

The Librarian issue is completely moot. We can't take them. It's the price you pay for everything else. If you don't like it, play another chapter.

Since you mentioned it, the most recent versions of my drop pod list can be found here: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/358211-2000pt-tourney-drop-pod-templar-v2-and-v3/

 

It is silly to avoid using the tools we are given for flavor reasons. If I was writing a codex for Templar in 8th edition, I would only make a few crunch changes to keep flavor:

1. Company Veterans, Terminators, Stern-guard, and Vanguard all gain the "Sword Brother" keyword, and access to the vigilus stratagems that go with that.

2. Helbrect gets his reroll rules updated to be in line with the vanilla chapter master

3. New Unit "Master of sanctity" with new litanies specific to Templar

4. Stratagems, warlord traits and special rules to make our chapter the best pick for deep striking armies.

 

Melee is a big part of our identity, but not to the same extent of other chapters. Rather than being really good melee marines, I think our rules should center around our orbital assault prowess, and ability to buff large crusader squads.

 

[Brother Tyler]

Something else to consider (beyond the evolution of the Black Templars) is the evolution of Games Workshop's differentiation between sub-factions.

Let's not forget that the Black Templars were originally a Codex (gasp!) Chapter when they were introduced in 2nd edition:

CAUTION! THE BELOW IMAGE HAS BEEN DEEMED AS BASE HERESY. OPEN AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Hidden Content

Development of the current (true!) version of the Black Templars occurred in 3rd edition, starting with John Blanche's evocative cover image for the rulebook/boxed set. That led to the initial non-Codex Black Templars rules as we knew them under Codex: Armageddon.

What we saw in 3rd edition was that Games Workshop applied a lot of distinctiveness to the various Chapters. The Black Templars were one of the most noteworthy examples, but the series of Index Astartes articles demonstrated a variety of ways in which Chapters were distinguished from each other from a rules perspective. In fact, a lot of the lore and rules [for various Chapters] may have been largely due to the objective of making them all distinctive to varying degrees. Some Chapters, like the Crimson Fists and Imperial Fists, had a history as "Codex" Chapters, so their rules were very mild compared to others. Chapters like the Raven Guard, White Scars, and Black Templars, meanwhile, were created as more divergent in nature and received lots of lore and rules to force that divergence.

The trend with creating distinctive rules continued, though at a reduced level, through 5th edition. By "reduced level" I mean that those Chapters that had their own codices (e.g., Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, and now the Black Templars) retained some level of distinctiveness, though some degree of standardization came into play. The Black Templars were toned down somewhat from their 3rd edition incarnation, whereas the other Chapters received new unique units to shore up their distinctiveness.

What we seem to be seeing now is that Games Workshop is implementing a lot less of the distinctiveness via major units/rules, though we'll see that distinctiveness via minor rules (e.g., sub-faction rules such as the Chapter Tactics, relics, stratagems). It's difficult to imagine the Black Templars without Crusader Squads and the Emperor's Champion - I doubt that we'll ever see those removed. Helbrecht and Grimaldus, too, seem like mainstays. It would be nice to see some additional special characters when the Black Templars supplement is published, but that will depend upon models (I'm expecting a Primaris Marshal/Castellan at the very least). Beyond that, the issue really becomes one of identifying how much of the older rules (Codex: Armageddon and Codex: Black Templars) were shoehorned in for the purpose of distinctiveness and how much was necessary for representing the true essence of the Chapter.

Clearly, different players have different feelings about how much the rules should drive distinctiveness, and this discussion is a good demonstration of the range of players' opinions on the matter.

Personally, I prefer that Space Marine Chapters be variations on a theme. I think that the Black Templars have almost the right amount of distinctivness (as I stated earlier, I'd like a few more special characters, and I'd like to see the return of the vows). I think that most of what should separate the Black Templars from the other lesser Chapters is represented by their lore and personality, and most rules/limitations aren't necessary. Most such implementations should be options (rather than mandatory). The preferrences of a Chapter won't change the fact that certain operational parameters might restrict those preferences somewhat. For example, the White Scars are known for their preference for bikes. However, it is unlikely that the White Scars will make large use of bikes in ship-to-ship combat, or when clearing a space hulk. Similarly, while the Black Templars might favor aggressive tactics and dislike defensive actions, it wouldn't be tactically sound to not defend the lodgment when clearing a space hulk. Similarly, while the current lore for the Black Templars doesn't allow the use of librarians, there is sufficient possibility that they had librarians at some time in the past. Personally, I'm in the camp that favors the "Sigismund didn't allow librarians, so the Black Templars never had them," but that is a personal interpretation rather than an absolute limitation, so players inclined to do so might create an army representing the Black Templars before they lost their librarians (not using the current rules, of course, but the Horus Heresy rules provide possibilities).

My personal Black Templars army is based around the clearing of a space hulk, so it features as many terminators as possible. I'm using a small fighting company, with a Castellan rather than a Marshal. Most of the force is geared for close quarters, though I'm including some heavy weapons for breaching and defensive operations (high rate of fire weapons for swarms of genestealers). I won't include a librarian, naturally, nor will I include the Emperor's Champion (in my crusade's lore, the EC is with the Marshal's household rather than with this fighting company). I'm also using a pure infantry force, but that's due only to the limitation of a space hulk as my envisioned battleground.

Naturally, my force will have challenges outside of a zone mortalis setting, so I'll eventually expand the options for dealing with that (probably Imperial Knights, but mostly additional Black Templars units).

An interesting note on my Black Templars Crusade is that it is set right after the death of Sigismund. So you won't see any Primaris, centurions, or Land Raider Crusaders (or anything else created after that time).

[Schlitzaf]

Pardon the bump; but I have been thinking a while about posting what I am about to say. This thread depresses me. The purpose of this thread was NOT to post nostalgic remisses. And largely speaking but it is my fault, but these weren’t really the answers I had hoped for and expected.

 

These answers actually made me think we should been rolled into codex space marine. And almost deflective. The first thing gonna emphasis on; Faux Devi’s are a remnant. But you know what is true?

 

They are our remnant. Why is this important crunch question aside. The fact we can still MSU Faux Devi is an important highlight for our disregard for codex Astartes*. It’s not just I look down on Devies, it’s that it’s an Codex Astartes unit bound but it’s regimentation.

 

A Faux Devi is a demonstration of how we as chapter both eschew that regimentation and true 40k fashion are complete hypocrites. A Devi has two advantages over Faux Devi; Cherub and Signum. A benefit of having squads and by extension gear dedicated in your armoury for them vs grabbing everything and kitchen sink.

 

The second is Tacticals over Crusaders have in past actually had benefits. The most consistent one is combat squading, representing a flexibility that is core part of the Codex Astartes, while in contrast Templars form squads not out of a tactical desire exactly but on bonds of brotherhood. And the lack of Crusader squad tactical flexibly on tabletop is an example of that. The second is generally we have more a piece of wargear we cannot access; Teleport Homers in sixth to seventh now melta bombs.

 

Teleport Homers example of tactical flexibility our army in an extent doesn’t have. Gameplay wise; Crusaders > Tactical (even Tactical hike cause MSU squads can still take a heavy at 5. Your paying for a Heavy Weapon + 5 points. And Melee crusaders strength comes form their body count/larger squad size).

 

But these are all aspects that are important. If everything is Templar, then nothing is. Folks are iterating “past editions, and x rule is remnant of that”. But we did lose our remnant rules.

 

LRC as Dedicated most important/minorly relavent flavor thing we lost in transition from 7th to 8th. (And something tbh I think as a Community we try and faq is back as a special thing for us but that a different tangent). A Templar army has to be is more than hyper focused aggression, that applies to BA and SW. And it cannot simply be “oh we have chappies/like Chappies” to some extent that is true of DA.

 

Our chappies notably allowed us to control RZ direction. But weren’t any different then other chappies. Through I will admit some later posts go to it. When I look a BT Force I know it’s a BT force;

 

Because the army is not a unified “military” army of set loadout and configurations. I see a Neo on 25mm and Init on 32mm. I see ad mixed loadouts, or more accurately I don’t see Squads. I guess what surprises me and depressed me and reason I hesitated to post, no one else seems to see Templar’s uniqueness as anything represented or shown in rules.

 

And I came out of this thread honestly feeling ‘oh there is no Templar identity”. Other armies if we asked; you’d hear stuff like Jump Pack & Death Company for BA, Raven & Death for DA, Wulfen and the Grey Hunter/Blood Claws for Wolves, in C:SM, Devies for IF, Stern for CF, Bikes for Scars, Packs & Scout for Raven, Dread for IH, a lot of flamers and melta for Salies.

 

This isn’t to say that the above isn’t true, but that no one else really feels “Crusader Squad & EChampion for Templars” and instead saying “strategy”. I guess; am I making any sense?

[Link2edition]

Well I will throw in a bone here.

I am pretty sure we can do massed terminator deepstrike better than other chapters. Our resistance to mortal wounds keeps folks from getting around our storm-shield saves, and the charge rerolls make charging from deepstrike more reliable. I am sure there is other synergy out there waiting to be found.

I have been thinking about it a lot because my drop pod templar had a pretty crushing defeat yesterday at the hands (pun intended) of the new IH book.

[Marshal Reinhard]

To be fair, right now is the worst possible timing to compare the current mechanical identity of BT and what what we can do vs the other chapters, who have all basically received (or are going to receive) a book each devoted to developing their lore and giving them additional rules and options catered to their respective styles of warfare.

 

We have yet to recieve this. Presuming we get the equivalent early next year psychic awakening book 2, there'll be more a lot more meat on the bones we can toss in this discussion

[Schlitzaf]

To be fair, right now is the worst possible timing to compare the current mechanical identity of BT and what what we can do vs the other chapters, who have all basically received (or are going to receive) a book each devoted to developing their lore and giving them additional rules and options catered to their respective styles of warfare.

 

We have yet to recieve this. Presuming we get the equivalent early next year psychic awakening book 2, there'll be more a lot more meat on the bones we can toss in this discussion

While not wrong, it’s still stunning to me that Crusaders squads were not seen as a fundamental aspect of our chapter mechanical/tabletop identity and reflection of how we ignore the “Codex”.

[Link2edition]

While crusader squads are indeed part of our identity, until we get our rules updated tacticals will be the better pick most of the time.

I generally just call them "crusaders with bolters" for this reason.

[Schlitzaf]

I disagree, unless your literally doing naked Saders (Cessors or Scouts would be preferable); Tactical cannot take heavy special special at 5 Man. And Storm Bolter/HvyBolter/Plasma or GravGun even of trying keep squads cheap outperforms what you expect from 7 man tactical squad squad instead.

[Link2edition]

I disagree, unless your literally doing naked Saders (Cessors or Scouts would be preferable); Tactical cannot take heavy special special at 5 Man. And Storm Bolter/HvyBolter/Plasma or GravGun even of trying keep squads cheap outperforms what you expect from 7 man tactical squad squad instead.

I understand what you are saying, but so far I haven't been able to justify spending 5 more points to unlock a second special weapons slot.

 

That isn't to say its useless, it just hasn't fit into any of my lists with this codex yet.

[Schlitzaf]

Just looking at your list; I do GravGun (or Plasma Gun)& HvyBolter over Missile Launcher. Then find the 10 points somewhere likely in Devi Squad. And not take Helbrecht over Marshall Law*. Using spare left over points to do so.

 

I mean your current squad is 82 points.

 

Missile Launcher is 0.5 or 1.75 hits depending on variation then vs marines 0.42 or 0.875 (and 0.28/ 0.29 dead marines).

 

10 Bolter Shots is 6.66 hits then 3.33 wounds 1.11 dead marines

 

Total 1.39 to 1.40 dead marines

 

————

HvyBolter/Storm/PlasOrGrav is 88-89 points

 

HvyBolter is 1.5 hits then 1 wound and 0.5 dead marines.

 

8 Bolter Shots is 5.32 hits then 2.65 wounds then around 0.88 dead marines

 

Plasma Gun is 1.32 Hits then either 1.1 wounds or 0.88 wounds. Kill an average 0.9 to 0.73 Marines depending if overcharging

 

GravGun is 0.66 hits then 0.44 wound then 0.37 dead marines

 

Total 1.75/2.28/2.1 depending Grav v Plas and over charging.

 

That is 33% increase in damage for around 9% increase in squad cost. Or 20% for 7.5%. And even if did do CombiPlasma/HvyBolter with tacticals instead. For 7 points more as Templars you a value of 12 points (Storm Bolter + Init Tax).

 

*Liutanent don’t have SBro keyword the cannot take Hand Grenade

[Link2edition]

I dont use the holy hand grenade anymore, but thanks for pointing that out.

 

I used helbrect for the +1 str. He is one of those mechanical flavor options.

 

I may give the crusaders another shot, but since they are backfield units i dont think the special weapons will be in range much

Edited September 27, 2019 by Link2edition

[Marshal Laeroth]

This topic has been weighing on my mind for some time now (since you originally posted the topic) and I still don't have a clear concise idea behind it.  Its tough for me, because I am so fluid with my lists.  But when I look at our "identity", I do not associate any one specific thing to the list.  And maybe that is a problem.  Sure we have Crusader squads, Grimaldus, Helbrecht, and the EC...but outside of taking our special characters for buffing purposes, its tough to build a list around those four elements in 8th edition.  There is SO much going on in the codex, especially the 8.5 one, that pulls us away from using them.

 

In 5th Edition, we had the start of min/maxing squads.  Efficiency was really important for competitive list building.  Now, everything dies to everything...so we need to be super efficient in everything, because those units may not last long enough to do what they were taken in the list to do.  Crusader squads are really the jack of all trades and sometimes that is a problem.  If I want a throwaway squad, I take scouts.  If I want a mid-field objective holding squad, I want intercessors.  If I want tricky deployment shenanigans, I take Infiltrators or Incursors.  What the crusader squads are good at, though...is taking large numbers of infantry or long-range fire support.  Which eats into a ton of your points and prevents you from taking more "nasty" things.  The biggest issue I have is that I want to take cheap troops, so that I can take the high powered stuff and multiple battalions for CP.  This is completely contrary to the Crusader squad's MO:  big and expensive.  In addition, you have to consider list synergy.  Do your troops fit what you are trying to do with the list?  Crusader squads can fit any role, but they are not always the BEST at it for the points.  Its a delicate balance.  Take the crusader squads if they fit the list, but use something else if they don't.

 

So I guess what I am trying to say is...unit wise, I am having a hard time using crusader squads as the sole identifying factor of what Black Templars are.  To me, its the idea of what the Black Templars represent (fluff).  I can apply that idea to any squad I am fielding.  I am liberal with my shooting, because I don't want to auto-lose...but I also ensure to take a decent contingent of close combat units in my list to make good use of our chapter tactic.  In our 8.0 codex, without doing so kinda begged the question:  why are you taking BT?  Outside of stubbornness, we were handicapping ourselves if we didn't have MSU combat units.  Fortunately, now we at least have some of the best mortal wound defense in the game so we can point to that if we don't have all those MSU combat units.

 

Anyway, TLDR;  I don't think we need to identify ourselves via a special squad or character.  If the rules change in our rumored Psychic Awakening release and generate extra stuff, then that might change.  But right now, that is kind of my stance I suppose.

[Link2edition]

 

So I guess what I am trying to say is...unit wise, I am having a hard time using crusader squads as the sole identifying factor of what Black Templars are. To me, its the idea of what the Black Templars represent (fluff). I can apply that idea to any squad I am fielding. I am liberal with my shooting, because I don't want to auto-lose...but I also ensure to take a decent contingent of close combat units in my list to make good use of our chapter tactic. In our 8.0 codex, without doing so kinda begged the question: why are you taking BT? Outside of stubbornness, we were handicapping ourselves if we didn't have MSU combat units. Fortunately, now we at least have some of the best mortal wound defense in the game so we can point to that if we don't have all those MSU combat units.

 

.

Dont forget never ever having to burn CP to make a charge!

[Medjugorje]

in my mind there is a core Black Templar identity

 

That is 

 

A emperors champion and other Charakters who are strong charakter killers. AND everything here is working in close combat - i mean its our duelist charakter.

 

Then there is our strong identification into mechanised crusadersquad. Means there are at least 1-3 big infantery squads who jump out of a LRC or Rhino to attack enemies in the fight phase...  Other chapters like the blood angels use their special flying deathcompany and their golden guard. Ultramarines dont have that special focus on melee units - and their transports are used for the same units but in another relation . They transport a few shooty troops and 1 special shooty and 1 special melee unit for example. Our army use to be much more aggressive. Although there are another Melee oriented Space Marines - they do it different - White scars use much more bikes and Dark Angels use always a combination of bikes and Termiantors...

 

And if there is a army that is not mechanized - other Space Marines are more static. Our troops are big then and more then 50 percent of them are storming up to front.