Ruleshammer 40k: Black Templars

Welcome to Ruleshammer Codex Supplement Black Templars – the one place to look for Ruleshammer Q&A on main book Black Templar issues! You can also find answers to many more questions in the Ruleshammer Compendium! Last Updated: 2022-02-04

Current Q&A

Do Grimaldus’ Servitors award VP for Assassination?

Q: Hello and thank you for the great work you do in clarifying the game. My question is related to Grimaldus and his servitors: are they characters and so they give up points for Assassinate, as the keyword seems to imply? Can an Apothecary bring them back? Thank you very much! – Stefano

Yes. The Servitors are Character models and award VP. There are a few other units with this issue, such as Celestine and her Geminae and Gaunt’s Ghosts (thought that unit isn’t exactly meant to be competitive as much as fluffy).

It does appear that an Apothecary could bring them back, however, as the whole unit is BLACK TEMPLARS INFANTRY, which is one of the two types of unit an Apothecary can use Combat Revival on. Because Assassination only checks deaths at the end of the game, a revived model will not count as destroyed for the purposes of awarding VP.

Wound Allocation for Chaplain Grimaldus

Q: If Chaplain Grimaldus takes a mortal wound can it be allocated to the Grimaldus model in the unit? If it can what happens if an attack proceeds to wound the unit, does Grimaldus take the wound or does a cenobyte servitor?

Essentially the rules just don’t really cover this; they are written expecting a unit to never be able to have more than one model with lost wounds, and Grimaldus causes an issue with that. For those not aware of how this unit works here’s the ability in question.

Mindless FollowersWhile this unit contains any Cenobyte Servitor models, each time an attack successfully wounds this unit, that attack must be allocated to one of those models. The destruction of Cenobyte Servitor models is ignored for the purposes of Morale tests. If Chaplain Grimaldus is ever destroyed, any remaining Cenobyte Servitor in this unit are also destroyed. In addition, Cenobyte Servitor models cannot be your WARLORD.

So “attacks” must be allocated to the Servitors, and if one of them is damaged subsequent wounds must be allocated to them as well per the usual wound allocation rules. However if a mortal is caused by anything other than an attack, such as a Pyschic Power, this rule doesn’t as written force those mortals to be allocated to the Servitors. Without an FAQ addressing this I think it’s probably best the suggest that all wounds go on the Servitors first based on the intent of the ability as determining which rule has priority between the core rules and the ability for where later wounds should be allocated is a grey area. Usually the codex would overrule the Core rules in these situations and you would allocate attack wounds to the Servitors regardless of the Chaplains condition.

Black Templars Chapter Badge

FAQ Update: Devout Push

A quick update to start us off, but as of the latest FAQ Black Templars can no longer use the Devout Push push movement to embark into the “penance wagon” any more.

Page 46 – Devout Push
Add the following to the end of the first bullet point: ‘That unit cannot use this move to embark within a Transport model.’

I don’t know how wide spread this actually ever was but the rule change prevents it. Something worth noting is that this is a specific limitation on Devout Push as a Stratagem. This clarifies that the models were ending their move closer and then embarking as was written.

Previous Answer

Q: Hello. We had a strong debate about the new devote push ability. During the fight phase à black templar unit can do a Normal Move to the closest enemy or the closest objective. May the unit use this ability to embark in a transport ?
Thank you your help!

So this one seems pretty odd both before and after the explanation, like it’s not in the spirit of the rule as such but yes a unit that makes a normal move with devout push can, rules as written, embark. The reason this works is because of when embarking happens. The devout push stratagem says this

If the unit is not with Engagement Range of an enemy unit, make a Normal Move of up to 3″ with that unit. It must end this move closer to the closest enemy unit or closer to the closest objective marker.

So you move the unit and they must end that move closer to the enemy or an objective. So you check they’ve done that when the move has ended. Then the embark rules are used.

If a unit makes a Normal Move, an Advance or it Falls Back, and every model in that unit ends that move within 3″ of a friendly Transport model they can embark within it. . A unit cannot embark within a Transport model that is within Engagement Range of enemy models, and it cannot embark if it has already disembarked from a Transport model in the same phase

So if a unit has ended the move both closer to the enemy or an objective, and also so that every model is within 3″ then they can embark. This happens after satisfying the conditions of the move required by Devout Push. Also because disembarking happens in the movement phase (other than when a transport is destroyed in the fight phase) a unit can disembark then, and then use Devout Push to embark in the fight phase.

One other thing to note about Devout push that makes this far more likely to be feasible is that unline a pile in move the rule only requires that the “unit” end the move closer to the closest enemy unit or closest objective marker. Rather than requiring every model end the move closer. So long as the distance between one model in the unit and one of the required locations is less than the minimum measured before you the move then this is allowed.

I drew a Rhino for that diagram and everything.

Have any questions or feedback? Got a rules question you want answered? Drop us a note in the comments below, ask a question in our Ruleshammer form, or head over to r/ruleshammer to discuss.