PDA

View Full Version : What The....? Seriously? What were you thinking?



AlphariusOmegon20
03-07-2012, 06:39
Having a read of the new Allies matrix chart for Black Templars, I came across some very odd allies, fluffwise.

The Chart (for those that haven't read it) reads:

Battle Brothers with Blood Angels, Dark Angels, IG, Codex marines, and Space Wolves. Ok we're good there.

Allies of Convenience with Grey Knights. Ok there.

Desperate Allies with SoB. Ok I can see that, few in the Imperium truly likes the Sisters' uppity attitudes, including the Templars which are almost known for being the horse's arses in the Imperium.

I read on and had a few WTF moments after that.

Allies of Convenience with Eldar and Tau? Huh?

Desperate Allies with Dark Eldar and Necrons? WTH?


Did anyone writing the 6th Ed. BRB actually bother to read the Templar codex before they wrote this thing? Why the hell would Templars ally with armies they are well known for fighting against fanatically, especially Tau (Nimbosa Crusade) and Necrons (Schrodinger VII)? Does it not say in black and white in the codex " Black Templars ABHOR the heretic, THE ALIEN, and the mutant"?

Now before you start saying "we've seen this thread before, everyone's complaining about the chart", no actually you haven't. My concern is not about the BRB allies chart, that's a take it or leave it proposition, and for the most part, I can change that myself to make it make some actual sense, and I realize I have no control over my opponent's army on whether it makes sense or not. So that's settled.

My Concern is for the Templar fluff in the next codex. I have to wonder if this is setting the groundwork for MASSIVE changes in well established Templar fluff, just to justify this odd viewpoint. What scares me more about it, is WHO might be writing said codex, and we all know what he's done to previous fluff in other books, slaughtering long established fluff and replacing it with godawful instances of fluff in the name of the "new and improved" 40K codexes.

My question is: when will enough be enough for this community?

Kijamon
03-07-2012, 06:43
You do realise it's an option to ally? You don't have to do it if you don't want to. At least I hope Games Workshop aren't going to come round to my house and force my Space Wolves to ally with Orks! No Games workshop, noooooooooooo!!!! Dakka dakka dakka.

Seriously though, just wait and see! How do you know what the fluff will be based on a chart? It's not likely to change much. They hate everyone but they are easily going to avoid shooting up Eldar if it means that the Tyranid force about to eat everything is going to die. It's a no brainer.

Unless you would prefer Black Templars to be retarded?

AlphariusOmegon20
03-07-2012, 06:52
You do realise it's an option to ally? You don't have to do it if you don't want to. At least I hope Games Workshop aren't going to come round to my house and force my Space Wolves to ally with Orks! No Games workshop, noooooooooooo!!!! Dakka dakka dakka.

You missed the part in my post where I stated allies were a take it or leave it proposition, didn't you? :rolleyes:


Seriously though, just wait and see! How do you know what the fluff will be based on a chart?

My question is how do we know it WON'T be?


It's not likely to change much.

Tell that to the Grey Knight, Blood Angel, Codex Marine and Necron players.


They hate everyone but they are easily going to avoid shooting up Eldar if it means that the Tyranid force about to eat everything is going to die. It's a no brainer.

Templars are the most UNLIKELY chapter to EVER ally with ANY xenos, even if it meant their death and destruction, per the current fluff.


Unless you would prefer Black Templars to be retarded?

No, I prefer established fluff not to be screwed with, just for the sake of doing so.

Necronartum
03-07-2012, 06:53
You do realise it's an option to ally? You don't have to do it if you don't want to. At least I hope Games Workshop aren't going to come round to my house and force my Space Wolves to ally with Orks! No Games workshop, noooooooooooo!!!! Dakka dakka dakka.

Seriously though, just wait and see! How do you know what the fluff will be based on a chart? It's not likely to change much. They hate everyone but they are easily going to avoid shooting up Eldar if it means that the Tyranid force about to eat everything is going to die. It's a no brainer.

Unless you would prefer Black Templars to be retarded?

This.

I prefer never to deal in absolutes. Anything is possible. Especially in a fictional universe. I haven't read the fluff yet, but perhaps the Imperium is approaching a stage of demise which is forcing it to ally with races it perhaps would never have considered before.

Although I did think it peculiar that they were allowed to ally with Eldar. The witch and the alien.

Clang
03-07-2012, 06:57
The Allies chart is a bit odd. Some entries appear to be purely for fluff reasons (e.g. no Tyranid allies), but others directly contradict fluff. Maybe some entries (or lack of entries) are intended to be for game balance reasons. But with so many possible combinations, i suspect quite a few combinations were just quickly decided without much thought.

Spell_of_Destruction
03-07-2012, 07:09
I think some people need to calm down a little and not take every permitted alliance too literally. It's mostly a ploy to encourage players to buy units from other factions. It doesn't mean that Templars are sitting around the camp fire singing Kumbaya with Necrons.

I think Kijamon made the point pretty well - Templars may hate all xenos but if a horde of Tyranids or Daemons show up they're probably going to ignore those Eldar and Tau at least until the main threat is dealt with.


The Allies chart is a bit odd. Some entries appear to be purely for fluff reasons (e.g. no Tyranid allies), but others directly contradict fluff. Maybe some entries (or lack of entries) are intended to be for game balance reasons. But with so many possible combinations, i suspect quite a few combinations were just quickly decided without much thought.

Possibly - that's kind of the point I'm making. Don't read too much into it from a fluff perspective. Tyranids can't take allies presumably because they are incapable of rational thought. Even if we stretch the concept of allies as far as we can, it's difficult to envisage a situation in which Tyranids aren't the major threat (ironic given their poor codex!). Maybe if Tyranids attack a planet which is also under an enormous warp invasion through a Daemonic portal - and in that case the situation is FUBAR.

Kijamon
03-07-2012, 07:16
I think some people need to calm down a little and not take every permitted alliance too literally. It's mostly a ploy to encourage players to buy units from other factions. It doesn't mean that Templars are sitting around the camp fire singing Kumbaya with Necrons.

I think Kijamon made the point pretty well - Templars may hate all xenos but if a horde of Tyranids or Daemons show up they're probably going to ignore those Eldar and Tau at least until the main threat is dealt with.

Personally if it bothered me that much I'd just play the battle as normal and then afterwards say "Hey mate, how about I control your allies and you take your black templars and let's see who owns this planet!"

TWO BATTLES FOR THE PRICE OF ONE!

Beppo1234
03-07-2012, 07:17
historically, DAs weren't allowed to ally with anybody as far as I remember. No biggie, having the option is better than not.

AndrewGPaul
03-07-2012, 07:31
Historically? Possibly in the 4th edition Codex. 3rd edition didn't make any pronouncements one way or the other that I recall, and in 2nd edition they could ally with Imperial Guard, Imperial Agents, Squats and Eldar, like every other Space Marine army. Before that, you could do what you liked.

Perhaps a letter to the writers might get a reply explaining their thought process behind the Allies table. You might want to be less confrontational with the language if you want a reply, though. :)

AmonRa
03-07-2012, 08:46
My question is: when will enough be enough for this community?

LOL, will the suffering ever end?

Sorry, I had to. I guess one could justify the allies table for Tempars by arguing that while Templars are xenophobic dullheads, they're still marines. This implies that they still posess at least a rudimentary grasp on what goes on in the galaxy and in what situation the Imperium finds itself in. So I think even the most zealous Templar would ally wiht Tau (little threat to the Imperium right now) aganist Nids (huge threat).

Cheers, AmonRa

Thud
03-07-2012, 08:48
No, I prefer established fluff not to be screwed with, just for the sake of doing so.

Haha. You've picked the wrong game, in that case.

Steinhardt
03-07-2012, 09:24
Cry much?

Then you'll love it when I place my 4 Runepriests and Allied Emperor's Champion on the board as a unit... And select Abhor the witch! for my vow.

rickie8437
03-07-2012, 09:33
I think some people need to calm down a little and not take every permitted alliance too literally. It's mostly a ploy to encourage players to buy units from other factions. It doesn't mean that Templars are sitting around the camp fire singing Kumbaya with Necrons.

I think Kijamon made the point pretty well - Templars may hate all xenos but if a horde of Tyranids or Daemons show up they're probably going to ignore those Eldar and Tau at least until the main threat is dealt with.


Possibly - that's kind of the point I'm making. Don't read too much into it from a fluff perspective. Tyranids can't take allies presumably because they are incapable of rational thought. Even if we stretch the concept of allies as far as we can, it's difficult to envisage a situation in which Tyranids aren't the major threat (ironic given their poor codex!). Maybe if Tyranids attack a planet which is also under an enormous warp invasion through a Daemonic portal - and in that case the situation is FUBAR.

this thread just failed its Ward save

Minsc
03-07-2012, 09:34
Don't like it? Then ignore the pages for alliances and/or don't ally with Xeno's.
Just because you don't want your BT's to ally with, for instance Tau, doesn't mean that no other BTplayer should be able to ally with Tau either.

Stop thinking you're the centre of the world, jeez...

Grocklock
03-07-2012, 11:16
Don't like it? Then ignore the pages for alliances and/or don't ally with Xeno's.
Just because you don't want your BT's to ally with, for instance Tau, doesn't mean that no other BTplayer should be able to ally with Tau either.

Stop thinking you're the centre of the world, jeez...

I second that, If you don't like it then thats fine, remember fluff moves on. Much like history, just becasue in the past France and England where at war it doesn't mena now we cannot stand together.
Things do change you know

x-esiv-4c
03-07-2012, 11:24
Don't like it? Take it to BOLS.

Lord Solar Plexus
03-07-2012, 11:38
Well, AlphariusOmegon20, if you needed any other demonstration that most people will like and defend whatever GW puts out, here it is. If in the next Templar codex we find out that they were hatched by Khorne, who is the Emperor's cousion and would love to come around for tea would it not terribly inconvenience his relative, Warseer will erupt in a storm of annoyance and irritation at everyone questioning this logical and unavoidable progress in fluff while asserting GW's inalienable rights.

Minsc
03-07-2012, 12:17
Well, AlphariusOmegon20, if you needed any other demonstration that most people will like and defend whatever GW puts out, here it is.

I don't like the ally-rules since it opens up for alot of abuse, and because it's frankly quite unbalanced. (Some armies get 3 battlebrothers, some got 0.)
That's also why I won't play with them.

Bubble Ghost
03-07-2012, 12:24
The allies matrix represents an ever so slight toning down of the knee-jerk, self-defeating bigotry which is a quality given to every single race in the game, as if intolerance, contempt and hatred are strong, manly traits that kids are supposed to find impressive and cool. It's a bleak setting but I always found the spin on this aspect of it to break suspension of disbelief - the sales-speak eagerness to show hatred and aggression as Awesome was just too transparent and artificial. It still is, really, but not so much. What's changed subtly is the rulebook's portrayal of the setting, not the Black Templars, who remain well ahead of the curve on mindless hatred.

SlippyFist
03-07-2012, 12:31
Yes, it might ruin fluff.
Yes, it is optional.
Yes, some people will abuse it.

Ever think that it was purely a financial decision for GW to officially put the ally rules in to sell more product?

MiyamatoMusashi
03-07-2012, 12:40
I second that, If you don't like it then thats fine, remember fluff moves on. Much like history, just becasue in the past France and England where at war it doesn't mena now we cannot stand together.
Things do change you know

France and England were indeed at war in the past. They are no longer at war - times do change.

But to say that France and England were never at war? The wars never happened? That's not times changing. That's revisionism. A retcon, if you will. And it would be a stupid thing to say.

I'm sure there's a comparison to be drawn there somewhere.

Steinhardt
03-07-2012, 12:43
Well, AlphariusOmegon20, if you needed any other demonstration that most people will like and defend whatever GW puts out, here it is. If in the next Templar codex we find out that they were hatched by Khorne, who is the Emperor's cousion and would love to come around for tea would it not terribly inconvenience his relative, Warseer will erupt in a storm of annoyance and irritation at everyone questioning this logical and unavoidable progress in fluff while asserting GW's inalienable rights.

I remember hearing rumours back in the day that they were thinking of turning Blood Angels to Khorne. I'd have been happy with that outcome.

I mean they cry all day over the death of their Primarch. Clearly being with the Emperor didn't help him any. I'd imagine them being swallowed by their rage, turning to Chaos, but at the same time being very anti-traitor legions due to past history.

Dryaktylus
03-07-2012, 12:52
and in 2nd edition they could ally with Imperial Guard, Imperial Agents, Squats and Eldar, like every other Space Marine army.

Nope. No Squats and no Eldar.

Chivs
03-07-2012, 13:01
Historically? Possibly in the 4th edition Codex. 3rd edition didn't make any pronouncements one way or the other that I recall, and in 2nd edition they could ally with Imperial Guard, Imperial Agents, Squats and Eldar, like every other Space Marine army. Before that, you could do what you liked.



Afraid not. In second edition the Dark Angels could not ally with non humans (Eldar and Squat). In 3rd Edition I'm pretty sure they couldn't ally with Inquisition forces either (there was a line about not wanting the Inquisition sticking their noses in). I don't know about the 4th Ed codex as I refuse to buy it.

Black Templars allying with Eldar? That'd have to be one hell of an alliance of desperation. (The farseer's just made everyone invisible like in Dawn of War, the Templar's don't know they're there. No, not even that Avatar.)

The problem with the overly familiar "Don't like it? Don't use it!" response that is given, is that while you may not like a choice and so can avoid using it, you can't control your opponent. So while Dark Angels player Jim refuses to use Eldar allies as his (older) codex says this wouldn't happen, he may still get upset when Black Templar player Jane brings along a large detachment of Tau ignoring this part of the background.

Fluff only evolves if you like the changes; if you don't fluff is retconned.

Lantern
03-07-2012, 13:15
Perhaps its simply a measure to help people avoid feeling "trapped" into choosing an army due it's allies selection ie "I really want to collect Black Templars but the Ultramarines get Tau as allies - damn, id better collect a Codex chapter then". At least you have the OPTION like your battle brothers, just not the inclination. Perhaps, it's also more to represent the Tau willingness to ally with, well, nearly anyone as opposed to the views of thier potential allies.

Stormtrooper Clark
03-07-2012, 13:18
Tau are Battle Brothers with Space Marines.
Sisters are Allies of Convenience with Space Marines.

Wot.

rickie8437
03-07-2012, 13:32
Tau are Battle Brothers with Space Marines.
Sisters are Allies of Convenience with Space Marines.

Wot.

space marine are not battle brothers with Tau, there allies of conv, the yellow one

Commandojimbob
03-07-2012, 13:40
space marine are not battle brothers with Tau, there allies of conv, the yellow one

No Tau and Space Marines are battle brothers - the Green one !

There was some rumours a while back that had the fluff moving towards Space Marines knowing some additional info on Tau that meant that they would be looking to defend them or certainly want to keep them on side.

Anyway it is not unusual - 3rd edition Tau codex had a nice piece of fluff of a high ranking Space Marine and his advisor being shown around a Tau military facility by and Ethereal (???) - a point of note was they were using a Leman Russ in their recreated battle field - showing off their anti-imperial training. The idea was classic Tau - show the Marine their superior ethos as a means to try and convince - as you can imagine, it did not happen.

Bookwrak
03-07-2012, 13:52
Sisters are Allies of Convenience with Space Marines.

Wot.
Is it so hard for people to actually remember fluff beyond whatever Matt Ward wrote in the last codex that got their knickers in such a twist? Soritas are the militant order of the part of the Imperium that spend all day going, 'Glory to the God Emperor, hallowed be his name-,' and who just might order you lobotomized wired into a drug fueled combat engine if they catch you being all heretical and stuff.

Meanwhile, over in the part of the Imperium that is all power armor all the time, you have the space marines who all venerate the Emperor in their own way, very few of which include actual deification.
"I mean, the Emperor was a pretty cool guy, but a a living god? No, while he might've been one bad mother-"
"Shut your mouth!"
"But I'm talking about the Emperor!"
"We can dig it."

You don't see how maybe that could cause a bit of operational friction between the forces? I'd also tell you to cast your gaze yonder to the excellent 3rd ed Witch Hunters codex, which had that great section laying out why a WH army might decide they needed to try and kill the hell out of loyalist marines and the like.

eldargal
03-07-2012, 14:02
People take the allies stuff too seriously. It isn't a hierarchy of formal diplomatic status between races, it is a hierarchy of who they might work with for the duration of a single battle BEFORE they go their own way and try and kill each other again. That's it. It implies not foreshadows NO FLUFF changes whatsover.

I will grant that it is silly that the Black Templars would be as uncomfortable working with SoB as they are with Dark Eldar and Necrons. SoB being as zealously bigoted against heretics and xenos as the BT themselves. But that's all. It is a complete non-issue as far as fluff goes.

Minsc
03-07-2012, 14:15
I'd also tell you to cast your gaze yonder to the excellent 3rd ed Witch Hunters codex, which had that great section laying out why a WH army might decide they needed to try and kill the hell out of loyalist marines and the like.

Heh, I remember reading this. I remember I was quite chocked in a "....err....oooookeeeyyyyy..." sort of way. Sisters of Battle are so pious they make Space Marines look like quireboys.

Commissar Davis
03-07-2012, 14:25
Cry much?

Then you'll love it when I place my 4 Runepriests and Allied Emperor's Champion on the board as a unit... And select Abhor the witch! for my vow.

I think that you won't. The C:BT has a rule stipulating that they cannot ally with any army with a psyker other than GK, this includes Inquisitors.

@ OP: There is a nice little exception to the 'anything goes' in the rule book under the heading "narrative". If you opponent is bringing allies, you can get them to explain their reasoning. I expect this to have so hilarious results, particularly if the player has done so for WAAC reasons, in many gaming clubs.

Inquisitor Kallus
03-07-2012, 14:34
People take the allies stuff too seriously. It isn't a hierarchy of formal diplomatic status between races, it is a hierarchy of who they might work with for the duration of a single battle BEFORE they go their own way and try and kill each other again. That's it. It implies not foreshadows NO FLUFF changes whatsover.

I will grant that it is silly that the Black Templars would be as uncomfortable working with SoB as they are with Dark Eldar and Necrons. SoB being as zealously bigoted against heretics and xenos as the BT themselves. But that's all. It is a complete non-issue as far as fluff goes.

And I remember you saying about how you would be aggrieved if they made multi aspect warrior kits..... . Some people got into their armys because of the fluff and ironically this allows people to do things that completely fly in the face of established background. Now, im all for people doing what they want to do in games, thats your right, to have fun and a really good time, but I for one am bemused by some of the alliances. Dark Angels and Orks? Shas-O-Really? I even love people using FW in armies, (as long as they dont take the proverbial) but some of the allies matrix just seems to steam roller over a lot of the background that ive come to love over the last 20 or so years. I will hardly ever play any pick up games, and will usually play with like minded people so this shouldn't be too much of an issue to me.

I have no problem with people playing their own games and doing what they want, as I hope they won't have a problem with me playing how I wish to.

Grampyseer
03-07-2012, 14:35
This reminds me of the scene on Misery where Annie learns that the writer has killed off her favorite character.....

Please don't hobble any of the GW execs.

In all seriousness, taking the racist zealotry of the imperium down a notch is probably appropriate. It makes them more believable, and I would hope, easier to relate to.

We have enough racist zealotry in the newspaper. ...

eldargal
03-07-2012, 14:39
I'm a fluff player, my point is that it has no impact on the fluff at all. None. If they wrote fluff justifications for why it was happening, like that 'rumour' of the Ultramarines protecting the Tau then that would be bad, just like multi-apect kits would be bad. But they didn't. I also agree some of the alliance choices are ridiculous, I really don't think the allies chart is particularly well thought out. But it doesn't change the fact that it is optional and has no bearing on the fluff at all. You want to complain about how it is ripe for abuse, fine. You want to complain how some of the choices make no sense, fine. But having a hissy fit because of the fluff when it has no impact whatsoever on the fluff is just silly.

Scammel
03-07-2012, 14:44
People take the allies stuff too seriously. It isn't a hierarchy of formal diplomatic status between races, it is a hierarchy of who they might work with for the duration of a single battle BEFORE they go their own way and try and kill each other again. That's it. It implies not foreshadows NO FLUFF changes whatsover.


It might not even be this - others have suggested that it's completely divorced from racial politics as it were, and instead represents how well they fight together and how their forces mesh. Marines and Tau might be battle-brothers because ranged firepower, tactical retreat and rational decision-making are all part of their battlefield ethos. Equally, Marines and Sisters might only be allies on convenience because maniacally running forwards and burning everything in sight (including what might be valuable locations) isn't really what most Astartes are about.

GodlessM
03-07-2012, 14:48
I agree with the OP and have been saying it for awhile, the matrix was mucked up. There is some gems in there but there are a lot of WTF bits that don't fit the fluff.

eldargal
03-07-2012, 14:49
I don't really agree with that, there is some indication that fluff was brought into it at some level, and other armies really don't fit in with that theory. Dark Eldar are brothers in arms or whatever with Eldar but the two have very different armies with very different tactics. Eldar can ally with Tau as well, who have a very different playstyle. Certainly you could make tactically similarish builds accross the three books but that is true of most codices. For Eldar, though, Dark Eldar and Tau both make sense from a fluff perspective (Dark Eldar are Eldar, the Tau ethereals were possibly engineered by the Eldar).

Having said that the allies chart is so bizarre you knows what was going on.:)

shinankoku
03-07-2012, 14:55
I think any army should be allowed a desperate alliance with any other army. Seems to me, in the war-torn universe o 40k, there's always something worse around the corner.

And, not that I'm complaining - as I have both armies - Eldar and Tau are battle brothers? Really? Like, as close as marines and IG? Really? Guess I'll just have to live with an avatar backed up by crisis suits and st 10 guns :)

Inquisitor Kallus
03-07-2012, 15:17
I'm a fluff player, my point is that it has no impact on the fluff at all. None. If they wrote fluff justifications for why it was happening, like that 'rumour' of the Ultramarines protecting the Tau then that would be bad, just like multi-apect kits would be bad. But they didn't. I also agree some of the alliance choices are ridiculous, I really don't think the allies chart is particularly well thought out. But it doesn't change the fact that it is optional and has no bearing on the fluff at all. You want to complain about how it is ripe for abuse, fine. You want to complain how some of the choices make no sense, fine. But having a hissy fit because of the fluff when it has no impact whatsoever on the fluff is just silly.

Are you suggesting im having a 'hissy fit'? :D Sorry that cracked me up. Anyway, it may essesntially set a precedent for future fluff. Look at the Necrons and Blood Angels, never would I have wanted to see something like that in the BG... . Im certainly not complaining about how it is ripe for abuse, that hardly bothers me. Really some of these alliances just make no sense and it is basically an extra avenue for GW sales. Dont get me wrong, I like the allies rules generally, and I will be using them every so often, but not all the time, and never in ridiculous ways that contradict the spirit of the background

Scammel
03-07-2012, 15:23
Look at the Necrons and Blood Angels, never would I have wanted to see something like that in the BG...

I've never really understood this fluff gripe. I've seen numerous rants, conversions and pictures concerning the event, when all that really happened was... they didn't kill each other on a single occasion. There are a couple of fluff abominations out there, mostly relating to GK characters, but why this one attracts the ire it does is beyond me.

eldargal
03-07-2012, 15:23
No not you, the OP and a few others around the forums.

You mean where the Necron and Blood Angels worked against a common foe once and then withdrew rather than risk a combat with no clear guarantee of victory? The incident that was then completely overblown into some kind of friendship between the two?:p All I'm saying is people are hugely overstating the importance of the allied chart and reading any kind of fluff implications into it is just silly. Some choices have some kind of basis in fluff, others don't.That is as far as it goes. Extrapolating the reverse, that the allies chart points towards radical fluff changes is just ridiculous.

Egaeus
03-07-2012, 15:51
People take the allies stuff too seriously. It isn't a hierarchy of formal diplomatic status between races, it is a hierarchy of who they might work with for the duration of a single battle BEFORE they go their own way and try and kill each other again. That's it. It implies not foreshadows NO FLUFF changes whatsover.

I suppose what fundamentally bothers me the most about the concept of allies is that it should be a narrative element, that the question of why these two armies, which would likely be killing each other under normal circumstances, are now working together. Now in some cases it isn't hard to devise reasons for such pairings, but in others it becomes much more of a stretch. But the simple fact is that since the Ally rules are "the rules" it removes any such necessity for developing a narrative. I don't have to care why Black Templars and Eldar are working together because the rules simply tell my they can.

Although there are a number of intances where there are huge disconnects between "the fluff" and "the rules" so it really shouldn't surprise anyone at this point.

AlphariusOmegon20
03-07-2012, 16:37
Well, AlphariusOmegon20, if you needed any other demonstration that most people will like and defend whatever GW puts out, here it is. If in the next Templar codex we find out that they were hatched by Khorne, who is the Emperor's cousion and would love to come around for tea would it not terribly inconvenience his relative, Warseer will erupt in a storm of annoyance and irritation at everyone questioning this logical and unavoidable progress in fluff while asserting GW's inalienable rights.

Point taken.


Perhaps its simply a measure to help people avoid feeling "trapped" into choosing an army due it's allies selection ie "I really want to collect Black Templars but the Ultramarines get Tau as allies - damn, id better collect a Codex chapter then". At least you have the OPTION like your battle brothers, just not the inclination. Perhaps, it's also more to represent the Tau willingness to ally with, well, nearly anyone as opposed to the views of thier potential allies.

And I don't fault that. I even said so in the OP. Don't get me wrong, I actually like the Allies idea and will use it. But at least make the chart make SENSE, according to the company's own fluff. THAT is the only issue I have with the chart directly. Indirectly, I feel we should be concerned for future BT fluff, along with other armies, because of PAST HISTORY of it changing to "wait, what?" issues.



People take the allies stuff too seriously. It isn't a hierarchy of formal diplomatic status between races, it is a hierarchy of who they might work with for the duration of a single battle BEFORE they go their own way and try and kill each other again. That's it. It implies not foreshadows NO FLUFF changes whatsover.

I will grant that it is silly that the Black Templars would be as uncomfortable working with SoB as they are with Dark Eldar and Necrons. SoB being as zealously bigoted against heretics and xenos as the BT themselves. But that's all. It is a complete non-issue as far as fluff goes.

Ok, then considering past history of changing fluff by one of the writers of the 6th ed rules, when SHOULD we be concerned and show our displeasure about future fluff changes? After the new BT book is out and it CAN'T be changed? I'd rather be concerned before, when we can show our displeasure and attempt to ensure it DOESN'T get changed, than stay silent until after release and allow it to be massacred.



I think that you won't. The C:BT has a rule stipulating that they cannot ally with any army with a psyker other than GK, this includes Inquisitors.

@ OP: There is a nice little exception to the 'anything goes' in the rule book under the heading "narrative". If you opponent is bringing allies, you can get them to explain their reasoning. I expect this to have so hilarious results, particularly if the player has done so for WAAC reasons, in many gaming clubs.

This is a prime example of what I am talking about. BT running around with a Farseer? I can't think of ANYTHING that goes more against current BT fluff.



And I remember you saying about how you would be aggrieved if they made multi aspect warrior kits..... . Some people got into their armys because of the fluff and ironically this allows people to do things that completely fly in the face of established background. Now, im all for people doing what they want to do in games, thats your right, to have fun and a really good time, but I for one am bemused by some of the alliances. Dark Angels and Orks? Shas-O-Really?

Dark Angels and Orks is another good example. Armageddon AND Piscina jumps to mind preventing that alliance in any form.



I'm a fluff player, my point is that it has no impact on the fluff at all. None. If they wrote fluff justifications for why it was happening, like that 'rumour' of the Ultramarines protecting the Tau then that would be bad, just like multi-apect kits would be bad. But they didn't. I also agree some of the alliance choices are ridiculous, I really don't think the allies chart is particularly well thought out. But it doesn't change the fact that it is optional and has no bearing on the fluff at all. You want to complain about how it is ripe for abuse, fine. You want to complain how some of the choices make no sense, fine. But having a hissy fit because of the fluff when it has no impact whatsoever on the fluff is just silly.

I'm a fluff player too. Again, I do understand allies is optional. The Allies concept is not my issue.

My issue is because a certain writer was involved in the creation of the rulebook as one of the main people involved, AND his involvement in the Allies Chart itself, AND his penchant for changing fluff, can we be SURE it will NOT have an impact of future fluff, beyond a shadow of a doubt? I say no, we can't. Hence why it is best to raise the alarm NOW that it COULD happen, rather than later after the BT book is out, and such changes ARE made and nothing can be said about, other than the standard "WTF' threads we get AFTER such changes are made. It's best to say something BEFORE it's done, to possibly prevent such abominations, as we all know GW doesn't listen worth spit afterwards. Why should they? They've already done it, it's a done deal at that point.

You do have to wonder if this chart was designed to set up such changes.

eldargal
03-07-2012, 16:44
OF course it could happen, GW could decide to advance the fluff forward, GW could decide they want to morph 40k into Mass Effect, anything could happen. The fact remains there is no good reason to assume anything WILL happen just because of a rules mechanic. You are getting far too excited over the possibility that something you won't like could possibly happen but without the slightest indication that it will.

I'm not trying to be rude or dismissive, but there is just no issue here at all. I hate stupid fluff changes as much as the next person, but what changes Ward has made are minor, are not done in a vaccum (he can't just do stuff for lulz, it has to be approved) and his fluff for both the SoN and the Necrons was actually really good. All this is in addition to the fact that a game mechanic only vaguely based on the fluff is not an oracle on future fluff changes.

Sexiest_hero
03-07-2012, 16:51
I'm a chaos fluff player Nightlords since 3rd, I don'tlikethechart for the simple fact that it gives Loyalist the Super legion codex we were promised: "we never said CHAOS legions". WE still get "Use black legion!" not only do loyalist get almost all their leigons in stand alone codexes, they get to use the together as they see fit. This will not change in the new codex.

Veteran Sergeant
03-07-2012, 16:55
I'm just glad this wasn't another thread complaining that the Templars and Sisters are Desperate Allies by people who can't see the fundamental differences between their ideologies and just see two 'religious themed" armies and assume they are natural allies.

Lord Inquisitor
03-07-2012, 17:11
I'm quite unhappy about the chart. It isn't so much a question of absolutes but relative alliances. Imperial guard are worse allies with the Inquisiton than Eldar and Tau are with each other? Black Templars are treat Sisters of Battle as barely-tolerated enemies but are better friends with the Eldar and their witches?

I'm okay with the chart being fluff based and particularly permissive or not. But it's inconsistent in the extreme.

ArmyC
03-07-2012, 17:13
Well relative to the Eldar at least, the allies of convenience works.

This is because if the Eldar think you are about to screw something up that will have long range consequences, they just sorta show up and tilt the tide of battle to their own ends.

No problem. We do that for free. We do it for ourselves really.

lanrak
03-07-2012, 17:28
Well its finaly happened.
GW plcs corperate managment have been hindering rules development for years in the focus on selling toy soldiers to children.

Now they are making a complete nonsense of the established history alot of narrative gamers belive is as important as the instructions to play the game.

GW plc are realy outdoing themselves by alienating themselves from a wide selection of potential customers as possible!

Inquisitor Kallus
03-07-2012, 17:31
Well its finaly happened.
GW plcs corperate managment have been hindering rules development for years in the focus on selling toy soldiers to children.

Now they are making a complete nonsense of the established history alot of narrative gamers belive is as important as the instructions to play the game.

GW plc are realy outdoing themselves by alienating themselves from a wide selection of potential customers as possible!

I wouldnt say complete nonsense. Some of it is just a bit strange.

Lord Inquisitor
03-07-2012, 17:31
Well relative to the Eldar at least, the allies of convenience works.

This is because if the Eldar think you are about to screw something up that will have long range consequences, they just sorta show up and tilt the tide of battle to their own ends.

No problem. We do that for free. We do it for ourselves really.

... And the Black Templars are like, whoa, where did you come from you ARMY OF WITCH ALIENS but cool let's fight together and we'll just hope you don't have some ulterior motive, but if the Sisters of Battle turn up to aid them in purging heretics whoa we will treat you as barely tolerated enemies, you LOYAL SERVANTS OF THE EMPEROR. :wtf:


Barring a major re-write of the fluff, there's just no way Black Templars are more okay with fighting with psychic aliens than with devout sisters. I'm okay with the allies charge being "permissive" or "restrictive" but it needs to be consistent. Eldar could be flat out forbidden for Black Templars to fight alongside, or they could be Allies of Convienence. Both are okay with me. But if Eldar are "Allies of Convienence" then Sisters of Battle should be "Blood Brothers" (or Blood Sisters?). If Sisters of Battle are Desperate Allies with Templars, then Eldar should be forbidden from allying with BT.

I'm okay with the ally matrix being harsh or allowing a lot of tenuous connections - but if it is fluff based, then the relative relationships need to be right, or the whole thing is just stupid and irritatingly restrictive. You might as well just say "anyone can ally with anyone else" and have a more balanced system if the fluff based system isn't going to follow the fluff! There's no way any imperial organisation is going to prefer allying with aliens than with other imperials as a matter of course!

In many ways, it's WORSE than not having a table. We can come up with reasonable ally groupings for campaign games ourselves. But now people will feel that they ought to use the "official" table despite all its stupidities.

yabbadabba
03-07-2012, 17:32
Lords of Terra: The threat to the Imperium, to humanity, to this very universe, has never been greater than now. Our augurs have declared that humanity cannot stand alone. This conclave has been convened to inform the servats of the Imperium of the necessity to take advantage of the additional resources this universe has to offer in terms of our battle for survival. And if these resources get used up, then so much the better.
Calgar: In other words we have to fight along side Xenos and other foul denizens?
Lords of Terra: No Imperial shall work with the forces of Chaos, for they are truly the end of us all. As for the others, if you can use it to your advantage, then do so
Kryptmann: Well I have been working on a pheromone controller for Tyranids ....
Lords of Terra: ...That's nice Kryptmann. Yes Helbrecht?
Helbrecht: DON'T WANT TO. They are all to nasty, slimy, witchy things that need to be stamped upon!
Lords of Terra: Helbrecht your control over your chapter is your own but you have to realise that the Imperium does not have the manpower...
Helbrecht: DON'T WANT TO!
Lords of Terra: You don't have to but ...
Helbrecht: DON'T WANT TO!
Lords of Terra: You don't have to but ...
Helbrecht: DON'T WANT TO!
Lords of Terra: You don't have to but ... Calgar?
Calgar: I wouldn't. Helbrecht takes those vows very seriously. In fact he takes any vow seriously. You remember that vow to eat 200 chocolate eclairs at once Helbrecht? Yes we were cleaning up the puke for weeks.
Helbrecht: DON'T WANT TO! HATE ALIENS! HATE WITCHES! NASTY WITCHES!
Calgar: Now you know why I don't bring Tigurius to these meetings.

Lord Inquisitor
03-07-2012, 17:40
Lords of Terra: No Imperial shall work with the forces of Chaos, for they are truly the end of us all. As for the others, if you can use it to your advantage, then do so
Kryptmann: Well I have been working on a pheromone controller for Tyranids ....
Lords of Terra: ...That's nice Kryptmann.
Ha!

(10 characters)

Inquisitor Kallus
03-07-2012, 18:00
Inquisitors can and will do occasionally, they are called Radicals... . The thing is they tend to be somewhat subtle about it as if found out they face death at the hand of Puritans. Therefore battlefield scale alliances tend to be very rare, though not unheard of. Tyranid allies though? I think not. Genestealers themselves are a different story (cults) but they would be better served as a list of their own, rather than seeing things like Hive Tyrants and Carnifexes joining cults.

AlphariusOmegon20
03-07-2012, 18:42
... And the Black Templars are like, whoa, where did you come from you ARMY OF WITCH ALIENS but cool let's fight together and we'll just hope you don't have some ulterior motive, but if the Sisters of Battle turn up to aid them in purging heretics whoa we will treat you as barely tolerated enemies, you LOYAL SERVANTS OF THE EMPEROR. :wtf:


Barring a major re-write of the fluff, there's just no way Black Templars are more okay with fighting with psychic aliens than with devout sisters. I'm okay with the allies charge being "permissive" or "restrictive" but it needs to be consistent. Eldar could be flat out forbidden for Black Templars to fight alongside, or they could be Allies of Convenience. Both are okay with me. But if Eldar are "Allies of Convenience" then Sisters of Battle should be "Blood Brothers" (or Blood Sisters?). If Sisters of Battle are Desperate Allies with Templars, then Eldar should be forbidden from allying with BT.


And that is my greatest fear about the whole thing, that we may be sliding in that direction, going against well established fluff.

Scammel
03-07-2012, 19:15
My issue is because a certain writer was involved in the creation of the rulebook as one of the main people involved, AND his involvement in the Allies Chart itself, AND his penchant for changing fluff, can we be SURE it will NOT have an impact of future fluff, beyond a shadow of a doubt? I say no, we can't. Hence why it is best to raise the alarm NOW that it COULD happen, rather than later after the BT book is out, and such changes ARE made and nothing can be said about, other than the standard "WTF' threads we get AFTER such changes are made.

Raise what alarm? To what end? Pre-emptive complaining acheives absolutely nothing, GW aren't going to listen and all it does is whip up negativity. Feel free to be annoyed when Helbrecht starts dating Farseers, as many of us (including me) will be, but right now there's no 'alarm' to raise, especially considering we have little to no idea what they'll actually do.


GW plcs corperate managment have been hindering rules development for years in the focus on selling toy soldiers to children.

Now they are making a complete nonsense of the established history alot of narrative gamers belive is as important as the instructions to play the game.

GW plc are realy outdoing themselves by alienating themselves from a wide selection of potential customers as possible!

GW make an odd allies matrix - Upper management are ruining the game! The company's gonna go bust! Called it here first people!

Egaeus
03-07-2012, 20:03
I wouldnt say complete nonsense. Some of it is just a bit strange.

Nor would I...it's a big universe and odd things happen all the time. As I mentioned before my major issue is that idea that these alliances, which should probably be rare and specific to some particular "greater threat", are cheapened by the idea that they are now an everyday occurrence.

The Black Templars Codex specifically has a section where it says they will not ally with models with Psychic Powers...I assume that rule is still in effect (nothing in the FAQ mentions it), so although you could ally with Eldar you wouldn't be able to include a Farseer or Warlocks...so maybe it's not as bad as some people think?

Steinhardt
03-07-2012, 20:11
... And the Black Templars are like, whoa, where did you come from you ARMY OF WITCH ALIENS but cool let's fight together and we'll just hope you don't have some ulterior motive, but if the Sisters of Battle turn up to aid them in purging heretics whoa we will treat you as barely tolerated enemies, you LOYAL SERVANTS OF THE EMPEROR. :wtf:
As was already pointed out. C:BT stipulates no allies with Psychic powers... But then these women show up and magic s**t starts happening... Looks like witches to me...

Grocklock
03-07-2012, 20:26
France and England were indeed at war in the past. They are no longer at war - times do change.

But to say that France and England were never at war? The wars never happened? That's not times changing. That's revisionism. A retcon, if you will. And it would be a stupid thing to say.

I'm sure there's a comparison to be drawn there somewhere.

I would agree with this point but it hasn't happened has it, also if something isn't mentiuoned in the fluff doesn't mean it didn't happen the codexs can only hold so much fluff matterial

Stormtrooper Clark
03-07-2012, 20:34
Is it so hard for people to actually remember fluff beyond whatever Matt Ward wrote in the last codex that got their knickers in such a twist? Soritas are the militant order of the part of the Imperium that spend all day going, 'Glory to the God Emperor, hallowed be his name-,' and who just might order you lobotomized wired into a drug fueled combat engine if they catch you being all heretical and stuff.

Meanwhile, over in the part of the Imperium that is all power armor all the time, you have the space marines who all venerate the Emperor in their own way, very few of which include actual deification.
"I mean, the Emperor was a pretty cool guy, but a a living god? No, while he might've been one bad mother-"
"Shut your mouth!"
"But I'm talking about the Emperor!"
"We can dig it."

You don't see how maybe that could cause a bit of operational friction between the forces? I'd also tell you to cast your gaze yonder to the excellent 3rd ed Witch Hunters codex, which had that great section laying out why a WH army might decide they needed to try and kill the hell out of loyalist marines and the like.

I'd be fine with it if Space Marines weren't apparently even happier to ally with Tau than Sisters. Also, wouldn't you think the Imperial Guard (Battle Brothers) would be even -more- concerned about it, since they're liable to get torched for so much as picking their nose near a heretical site once the fight is over with? Apparently Codex chapters look over their shoulders towards Sisters more than foul xenos.

I get it's just rules, I just think it's weird.

Spell_of_Destruction
03-07-2012, 23:31
People take the allies stuff too seriously. It isn't a hierarchy of formal diplomatic status between races, it is a hierarchy of who they might work with for the duration of a single battle BEFORE they go their own way and try and kill each other again. That's it. It implies not foreshadows NO FLUFF changes whatsover.

I will grant that it is silly that the Black Templars would be as uncomfortable working with SoB as they are with Dark Eldar and Necrons. SoB being as zealously bigoted against heretics and xenos as the BT themselves. But that's all. It is a complete non-issue as far as fluff goes.

Agree with this 100%.

It's mainly a mechanism to allow people to collect and use models from multiple codeces. That is all. I don't think it will have any impact on the fluff.

If they had applied a higher fluff standard when deciding what factions can and can't ally with each other, it would mostly have turned into a mechanism to allow Imperials to pick units from whichever Imperial codex they like. This may have made more sense in fluff terms but we would probably be sitting here with a 4 page thread whining about how the Imperial players get all the love.


I suppose what fundamentally bothers me the most about the concept of allies is that it should be a narrative element, that the question of why these two armies, which would likely be killing each other under normal circumstances, are now working together. Now in some cases it isn't hard to devise reasons for such pairings, but in others it becomes much more of a stretch. But the simple fact is that since the Ally rules are "the rules" it removes any such necessity for developing a narrative. I don't have to care why Black Templars and Eldar are working together because the rules simply tell my they can.

Although there are a number of intances where there are huge disconnects between "the fluff" and "the rules" so it really shouldn't surprise anyone at this point.

This disconnect already happens all the time though because there isn't a rule which says that certain armies can't fight against each other. Think about it.

What percentage of tabletop battles do you think are loyalist SM army v loyalist SM army? Do players go to the trouble of developing a narrative to explain these battles on every occasion? No - we just accept that on occasion (or frequently if you are a SM player) in the real world you have to fight battles against your own faction.

It's the same thing with allies. On the one hand it opens up lots of exciting narrative and game play opportunities but on the other hand it will open up new avenues of potential abuse. But codex abuse has existed for as long as I can remember. A lot of the competitive armies I have seen on the tabletop don't make much sense to me from a fluff perspective. In this respect I don't think that the introduction of Allies will change things much. Different players will get different things out of the Allies rules. Some people might use the rules to build cool fluff armies. Some will use the rules to achieve maximum tabletop advantage and will devise lists that will no doubt lead to a few raised eyebrows. No different from pre 6th ed then.

I personally don't intend to use the Allies rules much (unless I decide to collect that Word Bearers army I've been planning for years when the new CSM codex is released).

hashrat
03-07-2012, 23:59
Things sure changes since Angels of Death, Dark Angels = No allies of any kind.
It hardly matters thought, people will do what they please, regardless.

Xerkics
04-07-2012, 00:08
Im pretty sure the matrix is based solely on what would sell the most models as gw is a business which showed us over and over again that they care little about consistency of their fluff but more about sales which is fair enough. So like giving tyranid no allies is like an attempt to throw us off of their marketing plot :-p

Veteran Sergeant
04-07-2012, 01:00
If they were trying to sell the most models it wouldn't have any restrictions, lol

Tyranids have no allies because that makes sense. They shouldn't have any allies. And before you say "But Genestealer Cult!" No. Just no. I played Genestealer Cult and it has nothing to do with allied Tyranids.

Spell_of_Destruction
04-07-2012, 01:15
It isn't based solely on selling the most models just as it isn't based strictly on fluff canon.

I'm guessing they sat around a table and said "it would be a good idea to allow players to include small detachments from other codeces in their main force - what armies might reasonably fight alongside eachother without stretching the imagination too much".

EvilFuzzyDoom
04-07-2012, 01:20
"Allies of Convenience" means "Those guys we have decided to stop shooting for a moment because there's something more important to kill OR because we haven't noticed them yet."

Like when the Eldar fight with... anyone, really.

I particularly like the fact that Imperial Guard can ally with almost every other force because that leaves lots of room for theme forces like traitor guard or Gue'la mercenary armies - the Imperial Guard 'dex is the only "normal human" 'dex we've got, after all.

squeekenator
04-07-2012, 01:53
My only issues with the allies rules are that:
1) They didn't make Guard and Tyranids allies. Really GW? Really? Do you hate genestealer cults that much? Chaos and Daemons both get to be allies of convenience with Guard, so they clearly aren't worried that traitor Guardsmen will make anyone's head explode, so... why not? I can't even explain this away with the standard excuse of 'money-grubbing Gee Dub wants more filthy lucre', since most of the Guard units that would be added to Tyranid armies have a fairly high money : points cost ratio.
2) They didn't make Blood Angels and Necrons battle brothers. The nerd rage would have been hilarious.

Yeah, okay, some of their decisions were a bit odd - why do Eldar and Tau love each other so much? - but overall I have no real issues with giving players too many options. If some of the options are silly you can simply ignore them. The only time restricting options should be a priority is when it becomes a balance issue, which isn't the case here. If nothing else, there's no way they playtested the ally rules enough to know what's balanced and what isn't anyway.

Spell_of_Destruction
04-07-2012, 02:15
I can see why they let CSM bring IG allies and not Tyranids. Genestealer cult armies are not made up of former Imperial Guard regiments. They are something different entirely. Imperial Guard allies in a CSM army are simply Guard regiments who have turned to Chaos/rebelled against the Imperium.

Eldar/Tau isn't that difficult to explain. Tau are generally receptive towards other races. Eldar are pragmatic and keen to use other races to their advantage. Combine the two and you have two races which can work well with one another even if they aren't bestest buddies.

Also, the Tau Empire is still fairly limited in size so it is unlikely that they have tried to settle Maiden worlds to the same extent as the Imperium (by far the main cause of conflict between the Craftworlds and the Imperium). Tau are probably fascinated by Eldar technology (unlike the Imperium which sees it as unclean, xenos witch craft).

Again, I don't think we need to look to far for fluff reasons to justify the alliance. It's more of a signifier of the ability for two factions to work alongside each other.

wyvirn
04-07-2012, 02:38
Fluffwise, I'm not too biffed that Tyranids got no allies. From a gamer's perspective, it just seems like tyranids are being singled out for not receiving the best parts of the new edition. Not just allies, but emplaced weapons, flyers that aren't afraid of a laspistol, etc. That's not to say we didn't get better, or at least some buffs, but I can't help but feel like Charlie Bucket at the beginning of Willy Wonka looking into the candy store.

Schismotive
04-07-2012, 02:43
As a black templar player myself, I agree that the ally chart for them is pretty stupid. My codex has a funny little rule that says templars may not ally with any psykers, with the exception of grey knights (and the codex makes it pretty damn clear they're barely tolerated) ...so what happened to this? Does 6th ed just negate that and now we can? I don't really understand. Also, BT really wouldn't team up with someone like dark eldar even if it meant the death of their chapter, that's just the way it is the codex practically says that in bold print.

I also just don't like the ally chart from a gaming perspective, because setting aside abuse or cheese or "unfluffy-ness," it defeats the purpose of playing your army, with your codex. I love my army, why would I replace it with something else? Anyway it's not a big deal I guess, I probably won't use allies personally so there it is

squeekenator
04-07-2012, 03:02
I can see why they let CSM bring IG allies and not Tyranids. Genestealer cult armies are not made up of former Imperial Guard regiments. They are something different entirely. Imperial Guard allies in a CSM army are simply Guard regiments who have turned to Chaos/rebelled against the Imperium.

Yeah, I guess. But still, surely they must have noticed, at some point, that they were laying the foundations of a genestealer cult army, and to decide that no, we're not going to allow that... It's a lot less of a stretch than some of the alliances they did allow, such as, yes, BT + Eldar.


Eldar/Tau isn't that difficult to explain. Tau are generally receptive towards other races. Eldar are pragmatic and keen to use other races to their advantage. Combine the two and you have two races which can work well with one another even if they aren't bestest buddies.

Fair enough, I wasn't thinking about it in that way, but it makes a lot of sense.

Veteran Sergeant
04-07-2012, 03:57
If Genestealer Cults come back, I want them done right. Not some half asses allied with Tyranids rules where suddenly Trygons and Carnifexes are striding past Leman Russ tanks, lol. That' not fluffy, and it's not Genestealer Cults at all.

Egaeus
04-07-2012, 04:50
This disconnect already happens all the time though because there isn't a rule which says that certain armies can't fight against each other. Think about it.

What percentage of tabletop battles do you think are loyalist SM army v loyalist SM army? Do players go to the trouble of developing a narrative to explain these battles on every occasion? No - we just accept that on occasion (or frequently if you are a SM player) in the real world you have to fight battles against your own faction.

Actually I did think about this at some point...and I believe most people do just accept this, although I would argue that there are a number of "standard" narratives that could be used to explain such battles...a "training exercise" being one of the more simplistic tropes (although whether various chapters could/would muster companies for war games when there is so much actual strife in the galaxy is questionable). One side or both being the pawns of some "Dark Power" would be another simple, probably cliche justification. Of course, it just being a game no actual story is necessary, but the irony to me is that not attempting some kind of story for a battle seems completely anathema to GW's attempts to create a "cinematic experience".


As a black templar player myself, I agree that the ally chart for them is pretty stupid. My codex has a funny little rule that says templars may not ally with any psykers, with the exception of grey knights (and the codex makes it pretty damn clear they're barely tolerated) ...so what happened to this? Does 6th ed just negate that and now we can? I don't really understand. Also, BT really wouldn't team up with someone like dark eldar even if it meant the death of their chapter, that's just the way it is the codex practically says that in bold print.

I also just don't like the ally chart from a gaming perspective, because setting aside abuse or cheese or "unfluffy-ness," it defeats the purpose of playing your army, with your codex. I love my army, why would I replace it with something else? Anyway it's not a big deal I guess, I probably won't use allies personally so there it is

Happened to what? As I mentioned I assume the rule is still in effect. There are actually very few units that have psychic powers, and these are the ones you may not include as allies. So if you want to include Eldar that means no Farseers or Warlocks. If you have allied Guard no Primaris Psykers or Psyker Battle Squads. And even with Battle Brother Marines you can leave the Librarians at home. I assume that when they say Grey Knights they actually mean Grey Knights, so Psychic Inquisitors and Psychic Henchmen are still out (although I did note that Daemonhosts are no longer Psykers...so I can include my radical Inquisitor with his Daemonhosts in my counts-as-Templars army once again...it gets them all riled up :evilgrin:).

Although the current Black Templar Codex is a 4th edition book, so I would hope we would get a new Codex in the near future...and things might change, in fact I fully expect some things to change. I don't expect them to suddenly embrace psykers but they may change their rules to a more grudging acceptance if it seems absolutely necessary to have them around.

EDMM
04-07-2012, 04:54
It is the single stupidest thing GW has done in 20 years.

Imagine that.

Spell_of_Destruction
04-07-2012, 06:09
Well we had Allies in 2nd ed an that was 15-20 years ago.

I could have cheesed up my Eldar even more back then by adding some Wolf Guard Terminators but I didn't. Neither did anyone else in my anecdotal experience. If I had tried I would have been roundly castigated and rightly so.

Gamers need to act like adults and take a bit of responsibility for how they use the rules. It's a game not Tax Law.

yabbadabba
04-07-2012, 06:54
It is the single stupidest thing GW has done in 20 years.

Imagine that. Do you really believe that?

Grocklock
04-07-2012, 11:15
I think the signgle most stupidest thing is people getting upset at this, GW have not changed the fluff yet have they, so that is in air quotes safe. but a side too that while there are a though people out there who belive them to be the guardians of the fluff and no matter what you cannot change it. There are others who would like too see a chnge, me for 1 would love to see the imperium have to change and adapt to the changing universe. I love the idea that the templar have this hatred towards some races but in some situations are forced to team with them too deal with a bigger threat.

it must also be pointed out beings as GW has such a larger fan base, anything it does it not going to please everyone.

AlexHolker
04-07-2012, 11:35
As was already pointed out. C:BT stipulates no allies with Psychic powers... But then these women show up and magic s**t starts happening... Looks like witches to me...
The Emperor isn't a witch. Trying to argue otherwise only demonstrates that you don't know jack about the setting.

Scammel
04-07-2012, 11:42
The Emperor isn't a witch. Trying to argue otherwise only demonstrates that you don't know jack about the setting.

How do you know? Been dabbling in the dark arts have we? WITCH!!

You're evidently the one with a chronic lack of understanding about both the setting. Of course the BTs might look upon the so-called 'miracles' of their sisters-in-arms with suspicion. How can they prove that it's Emperor protecting them? What if it's all a conspiracy to hide the taint within the Ecclesiarchy? I call for a crusade! Besides, the whole point is that whether you're a witch or a psyker depends upon where you're standing.

Tellos
04-07-2012, 13:56
Just my thoughts.

No self respecting black templar player should ever
ally with aliens.

Dead to the xenos.

sverigesson
04-07-2012, 13:59
The problem with the overly familiar "Don't like it? Don't use it!" response that is given, is that while you may not like a choice and so can avoid using it, you can't control your opponent. So while Dark Angels player Jim refuses to use Eldar allies as his (older) codex says this wouldn't happen, he may still get upset when Black Templar player Jane brings along a large detachment of Tau ignoring this part of the background.

Sounds like Dark Angels player Jim needs to get his panties untwisted. Since when should Jim get any say in how Jane gets enjoyment from playing the game? It is not Jim's right or responsibility to be the fluff police here. So, the point stands: don't like it, don't use it. And if Jim is so anal as to get upset about how Jane like to play her army (and why is he so invested in Black Templar fluff when he's playing Dark Angels?!?!?), then he sounds like he's a ******, and I don't think many people would want to play him.

I only say this so candidly because we're talking about a hypothetical "Jim", and I sincerely hope that you are not, in fact, Jim. Please don't be Jim.

Veteran Sergeant
04-07-2012, 14:14
Some people enjoy the fluff aspect of the game, and it sorta diminishes the experience for them when it gets broken. It's all a matter of personal preference. If he acts like a dick about it, then that's bad sportsmanship, but being bothered by a Black Templar/Tau army seems fair. After all, it's a bit of a stretch on its beliveability in the background. It isn't about begrudging Jane, more a failure for it to liveup to expectations. It's the same reason back in the day when I played more, I never played my Space Marines against my friends who had Space Marines, and instead broke out my Tyranids or Guard. Not everybody has more than one army though.

Of course, considering the game is principally Space Marines fighting each other these days, I guess the fluff is somewhat irrelevant unless you're just pretending all the battles are theoretical or force on force training. ;)

sverigesson
04-07-2012, 15:32
Exactly. Why would most of the Space Marine Chapter fight each other? Let let the fluff be a guide, but let it stay flexible. I'd rather have an allies chart that opens up possibilities for creativity and fun, rather than one that totally abides by the fluff as it is. Really, do we need more Imperial favoritism? Because that's what it would be: "All Imperial armies get to ally with each other, and everyone else is out of luck." Hyperbole: yes. Far from the truth: not terribly.

Scammel
04-07-2012, 15:34
Exactly. Why would any of the Space Marine Chapter Fight each other? Unless one is a traitor chapter.

Sacking of Prospero? Badab War? Plenty of occasions when loyal Marines have fought each other.

sverigesson
04-07-2012, 16:46
Sacking of Prospero?

You mean Space Wolves vs. Thousand Sons during the Horus Heresy? Hardly loyal marines, were they?


Badab War?

Weren't they a bunch of secessionists? Again, not so loyal.

Anyways, this just serves to illustrate the point anyway. If there is a good fluff reason, you can justify anything, even Codex Marine vs. Codes Marine, or Space Wolves vs. Imperial Guard, or Blood Angels vs. Dark Angels, or anything vs. anything. How is allying any different? Good fluff can explain any of these "against the fluff" allies the same way it can explain the aforementioned examples of Marines against Marines.

Egaeus
04-07-2012, 17:03
Anyways, this just serves to illustrate the point anyway. If there is a good fluff reason, you can justify anything, even Codex Marine vs. Codes Marine, or Space Wolves vs. Imperial Guard, or Blood Angels vs. Dark Angels, or anything vs. anything. How is allying any different? Good fluff can explain any of these "against the fluff" allies the same way it can explain the aforementioned examples of Marines against Marines.

I agree, but my issue is what constitutes "good" fluff and what is bending things to extremes simply to justify something? If "fluff justification" is the sole arbiter then in theory you should have no limits on alliances...as you can always create some desperate end-of-the-universe event if two armies don't work together for some common goal.

Just off the top of my head: Tyranid with Eldar allies...the Farseers have determined that the enemy leader (see, this allows it to be used for any opposing army except perhaps Tyranids themselves) is going to escape from the planet and go on to cause all kinds of havoc...so under cover of the Tyranid invasion they slip in, assassinate him, and slip out. Heck, maybe they're even willing to give their lives to save others if the predictions are dire enough.

Actually, the whole "Farseers see something bad coming and attempt to stop it" seems like it would pretty well allow them to ally with anyone...it may not be a close alliance, but it's there. One could almost use the same sort of justification for Grey Knights or any other psychic race that does divination.

Essentially you get to a point where you can really justify anything you want. As I said in my previous posts is that while this is completely doable having every game revolve around some extremely odd coincidence requiring two forces that would normally be tearing each other apart to get along takes away from the...I guess "strength" of the background is the best term I can think of at the moment. So the Imperium is this oppressive, xenophobic, aggressive empire...except when they're being buddy-buddy with the aliens they supposedly hate. Yes, I know it's a big dose of hyperbole as this isn't going to be every game...just that the rules allow it to become common enough that is is annoying.

Scammel
04-07-2012, 17:13
Hardly loyal marines, were they?

The Sons were totally loyal. They never even entertained the notion of rebellion. Magnus himself was loyal to the point where he refused to retaliate until the battle was effectively over and let most of his own legion be destroyed.


Weren't they a bunch of secessionists? Again, not so loyal.


I'm not as clued up on the Badab War, but I was under the impression that Huron was pretty much forced to secede after the Imperial reaction to his (pretty legit) policies. But really, the point's moot. becuase as you said, pretty much anything can be justified. Those are just two good examples of instances where it may not necessarily have been 'loyalists v. loyalists', but would justify the use of Codex:SM on both sides.

eldargal
04-07-2012, 17:19
How is seeing Black Templar with Tau any worse for a fluff player as seeing unique Special Characters in every other list, min-maxxed power builds and all kinds of other un-fluffy goings on? I can swallow the idea of Black Templar making a desperate last stand against my Eldar support by some Tau who are in the same situation as the BT more easily than seeing Draigo turn up to every single skirmish against said Eldar.

AlphariusOmegon20
04-07-2012, 18:06
How is seeing Black Templar with Tau any worse for a fluff player as seeing unique Special Characters in every other list, min-maxxed power builds and all kinds of other un-fluffy goings on? I can swallow the idea of Black Templar making a desperate last stand against my Eldar support by some Tau who are in the same situation as the BT more easily than seeing Draigo turn up to every single skirmish against said Eldar.

And I do agree with you on the issue of SC's, they are overused somewhat. However, you have to temper fluff play with some of SC's to MAKE game play correct sometimes. Vulkan is a perfect example of this. Without Vulkan, Salamanders are just green painted Ultramarines. It is Vulkan's rules that make them feel like Salamanders. I'll grant that Vulkan, and others like him, are the exception, not the rule. Wazzdakka fits in this category also. It's just doesn't feel an Evil Sunz army until you start to have Bikers as troops. Otherwise, they feel like any old Orks.

If you are a BT player, it implies clearly in the codex. "BT hate ALL witches, aliens, and mutants; and will not ally with them under ANY circumstances". You most certainly can't call yourself a fluff player if you're taking Tau as an ally. I'd even argue that you really can't call your army a true BT force because you went against the main tenement of the army itself. That is not following the fluff as written.

sverigesson
04-07-2012, 18:40
And what if I did consider myself a true Black Templar player (I'm not, but go along with me) and allied with Eldar? Is is really that inconceivable? And is it anyone else's business but mine how I like to build and fluff my army? I agree that maybe they screwed the pooch with Sisters being desperate allies, but whatever, I'm not going to get upset over it. And I definitely don't care if someone brings Black Templar and Eldar, Grey Knights and Necrons, or Space Wolves and Tau. Just pretend they're a more moderate successor chapter or something.

Oh, and I play Guard, and I love that I get to effectively ally with almost every army! Except Necrons, which I've been aching to collect! Damn...

Azzy
04-07-2012, 19:12
Desperate Allies with SoB. Ok I can see that, few in the Imperium truly likes the Sisters' uppity attitudes, including the Templars which are almost known for being the horse's arses in the Imperium.

Really? If anything, the BT and Sisters should get along better than the BT with some other SM chapters (especially SW or BA--damned mutants, or DA--they're probably heretics). Both have similar goals (burn witches, mutants and heretics) and have worked well with each other in the existing fluff (e.g.: Vinculus Crusade

Surgency
04-07-2012, 19:50
Really? If anything, the BT and Sisters should get along better than the BT with some other SM chapters (especially SW or BA--damned mutants, or DA--they're probably heretics). Both have similar goals (burn witches, mutants and heretics) and have worked well with each other in the existing fluff (e.g.: Vinculus Crusade

You don't really know the sisters fluff then, do you... Sure they're all about burning witches, heretics, and mutants, but Space Marines don't venerate the Emperor as a god, so the Sororitas regularly pushes to prosecute chapters that don't agree as heretical. I'm sure the Templar would appreciate that. Granted, the Sororitas is usually rebuffed in their attempts at persecution, but occasionally they're allowed to, something the Templars could also see as a threat. And what of the Templars refusal to submit to the "1000 brother" limit as written down in the Codex Astartes? The Inquisition, in the form of the Ordo Hereticus, has on several occasions posited that the Templars may be walking the line of Heresy. I'm sure Helbrecht is okay with that though, and has no problem fighting alongside the very force who accuses his marines of being heretics...



My issue is because a certain writer was involved in the creation of the rulebook as one of the main people involved, AND his involvement in the Allies Chart itself, AND his penchant for changing fluff, can we be SURE it will NOT have an impact of future fluff, beyond a shadow of a doubt? I say no, we can't. Hence why it is best to raise the alarm NOW that it COULD happen, rather than later after the BT book is out, and such changes ARE made and nothing can be said about, other than the standard "WTF' threads we get AFTER such changes are made. It's best to say something BEFORE it's done, to possibly prevent such abominations, as we all know GW doesn't listen worth spit afterwards. Why should they? They've already done it, it's a done deal at that point.

You do have to wonder if this chart was designed to set up such changes.

Who are you to say what GW does with its IP? And how do you know Ward wrote the allies part? I don't remember any bylines under the chart. Furthermore, if GW IS moving their stuff in this direction, what makes you think they care what you say? GW is going to expand the universe however it wants to, not however some agitated posters on some random internet forums think it should be expanded.

Azzy
04-07-2012, 20:48
You don't really know the sisters fluff then, do you...
Um, yes, I do.... thank you very much.


Sure they're all about burning witches, heretics, and mutants, but Space Marines don't venerate the Emperor as a god, so the Sororitas regularly pushes to prosecute chapters that don't agree as heretical.
Right, and space marines barely count as human, too (given all their alterations). And while they're unlikely to ask for help from marines, the have and do assist the ass-tarts from time to time (sometimes even willingly--like that Vinculus Crusade I mentioned).


I'm sure the Templar would appreciate that. Granted, the Sororitas is usually rebuffed in their attempts at persecution, but occasionally they're allowed to, something the Templars could also see as a threat. And what of the Templars refusal to submit to the "1000 brother" limit as written down in the Codex Astartes? The Inquisition, in the form of the Ordo Hereticus, has on several occasions posited that the Templars may be walking the line of Heresy. I'm sure Helbrecht is okay with that though, and has no problem fighting alongside the very force who accuses his marines of being heretics...
Even though they've allied (willingly, even) in existing fluff? I believe the BT have even incorporated the Sororitas's emblem in one of their standards.

All of which evades the point I was making that, based on existing fluff, BT would more willing ally with the Soroitas than with SM chapters that feature obvious mutations or who are using psykers, or DA, in particular, after the events of the Ophidium Gulf Crusade.

Veteran Sergeant
04-07-2012, 21:12
I don't agree. The Black Templars are near heretical themselves with their inflated numbers and fleet. This is a case where they have a lot of parallels in their themes, but they aren't compatible. Ultimately, other Space Marines at least share a similar agenda. The Sisters are notoriously sticky about the rules, and Space Marines notoriously sticky about their independence from Imperial control. The Sisters and Templars may both hate witches, but they have preety different overall agendas and objectives. The Sisters have too many ties to organizations that Space Marines don't trust (Ecclessiarchy and Inquisition) to make desirable allies.

Azzy
04-07-2012, 21:15
And yet... existing fluff. :eyebrows:

Lord Inquisitor
04-07-2012, 21:58
I don't agree. The Black Templars are near heretical themselves with their inflated numbers and fleet. This is a case where they have a lot of parallels in their themes, but they aren't compatible. Ultimately, other Space Marines at least share a similar agenda. The Sisters are notoriously sticky about the rules, and Space Marines notoriously sticky about their independence from Imperial control. The Sisters and Templars may both hate witches, but they have preety different overall agendas and objectives. The Sisters have too many ties to organizations that Space Marines don't trust (Ecclessiarchy and Inquisition) to make desirable allies.

The point is not necessarily whether Inquisitorial or Ecclesiarchical forces are best buddies with Space Marines, they're not, but are they going to be distrusted on the battlefield as much or more than aliens!?

I can't imagine any chapter that would rather fight alongside the heretical and blasphemous alien than with sisters fiercely loyal to the Emperor, despite any ideological differences. Never mind that this table is going to show "typical" alliances. We aren't talking about a putative specific case.

I'm okay with sisters being only convenient allies. Desperate allies seems a bit much, but I could be okay with that if the rest of the chart made sense. The ideological differences between astartes and sororitas pale in comparison to those between dark and light Eldar. Nobody likes hanging out with the inquisition but surely them taking control of units is common enough to warrant "blood brothers" staus - and if it doesn't, why on earth would it be okay for Eldar and Tau, who really rarely have much to do with each other, to enjoy a more trusted alliance?

You can justify any given link in the ally matrix but it is in comparison that the flaws are apparent.