Blood angels before sanguinius?

[Brother-Captain Devlonir]

The new codex fluff kind of sucks. I just ignore it.

 

...

I'm very sorry and I know this brings the thread off track.. but seriously..

 

come on..

 

seriously?

 

Do you even know how elitistly 'lore geek who doesn't like changes to his wovely little world' you sound when you type something like that?

Fluff changes to fit the needs of the changing game.. live with it!

 

So.. new codex fluff sucks and you ignore it.. so you don't play Seth? or Sanguinary Guard? And your army is still led by a Sanguinary High Priest? And Baal is not under attack in your mind?

 

Why do some people insist on saying old stuff is always better and new stuff should be ignored? When one of the biggest fun parts of Lore geeking is discussions like this thread that simply handle how we live with changing fluff and lore around our favorite chapter which we want to know all details about. How we explain certain changes and inconsistencies is what makes us valued readers! People that just say: "this sucks, ignore it" are very ignorant and well.. just stupid. I have to stop myself from suggestion which News Channel he must watch..

 

Add to the discussion or keep your opinion to yourself please.

 

Sorry about that.. it's just.. ugh.. I totally dislike dumb, short sighted and completely useless comments like that in a good fluff discussion thread like this..

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

well, the old fluff that i remember says that all 20 legions and their primarchs all took part in the great crusade. I dont remember ever reading that they were all there for the very start of the crusade. Do you have a source for every legion being present at the start? Given that this would contradict the alpha legion fluff as well, you'll permit me to doubt it i'm sure.

black library isn't canon fluff.

 

as you can see our brethren from the other chapters seem to have never heard of anything stating that not all of the legions were around for the start of the crusade.

(forgot to put the link in)http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=208947&st=0&gopid=2492981entry2492981

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

The new codex fluff kind of sucks. I just ignore it.

 

...

I'm very sorry and I know this brings the thread off track.. but seriously..

 

come on..

 

seriously?

 

Do you even know how elitistly 'lore geek who doesn't like changes to his wovely little world' you sound when you type something like that?

Fluff changes to fit the needs of the changing game.. live with it!

 

So.. new codex fluff sucks and you ignore it.. so you don't play Seth? or Sanguinary Guard? And your army is still led by a Sanguinary High Priest? And Baal is not under attack in your mind?

 

Why do some people insist on saying old stuff is always better and new stuff should be ignored? When one of the biggest fun parts of Lore geeking is discussions like this thread that simply handle how we live with changing fluff and lore around our favorite chapter which we want to know all details about. How we explain certain changes and inconsistencies is what makes us valued readers! People that just say: "this sucks, ignore it" are very ignorant and well.. just stupid. I have to stop myself from suggestion which News Channel he must watch..

 

Add to the discussion or keep your opinion to yourself please.

 

Sorry about that.. it's just.. ugh.. I totally dislike dumb, short sighted and completely useless comments like that in a good fluff discussion thread like this..

i can't lie i think some of the fluff was written rather...poorly, like mephy walking through a hive fleet practically on his own...yes he's super uber, but...that's stretching it...and the SG 'having been around all along' was stupid, they should have come one with some reason why the SG suddenly showed up, like there was seen some need for them and the unit was created.

[Brother-Captain Devlonir]

i can't lie i think some of the fluff was written rather...poorly, like mephy walking through a hive fleet practically on his own...yes he's super uber, but...that's stretching it...and the SG 'having been around all along' was stupid, they should have come one with some reason why the SG suddenly showed up, like there was seen some need for them and the unit was created.

 

Hey, totally agree there.. although the Sang Guard retcon fits better than them suddenly showing up I think. Where did all the Artificer Armor come from if they are brand new? (although they could have stolen it from the Captains :yes: )

Still.. To simply state that new lore is stupid and should be ignored is also not the way to go, that's the point I made.

 

To add to the real thread:

I believe the text goes both ways really.. I think that in current fluff you can say the IX Legion was created pre-finding of Sanguinius, but that the Baalites were seen as perfect candidates for the Angel's geneseed. I suggest a simple transition of time, time being something the W40k universe has lots of!

Say after Sang's finding all new Angel's were created from native Baalites, with the attrition rate under Space Marines, especially in the time of the Crusades, it does not take more then a decade or two for nearly all Blood Angels to be from Baal. That is nearly instantanious in the timeline of the W40k universe. And maybe, only those new marines called themselves Blood Angels at first, while the older 9th legion members did not refer to themselves in that name.

 

This explains both why a 'new' legion was created, as well as older fluff that the 9th legion was given to Sanguinius. In the unfathomable long timeline of 40k, small mistypings or unclear old writings can lead to misunderstandings about the scale and exact timeline of things occuring. This can also be used to explain slight inconsistencies, even if it is more speculation than actual lore source quoting. But when two quotes contradict, the speculations are worth a lot more I feel ;)

 

Just my 2 credits though.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

i can't lie i think some of the fluff was written rather...poorly, like mephy walking through a hive fleet practically on his own...yes he's super uber, but...that's stretching it...and the SG 'having been around all along' was stupid, they should have come one with some reason why the SG suddenly showed up, like there was seen some need for them and the unit was created.

 

Hey, totally agree there.. although the Sang Guard retcon fits better than them suddenly showing up I think. Where did all the Artificer Armor come from if they are brand new? (although they could have stolen it from the Captains :yes: )

Still.. To simply state that new lore is stupid and should be ignored is also not the way to go, that's the point I made.

 

To add to the real thread:

I believe the text goes both ways really.. I think that in current fluff you can say the IX Legion was created pre-finding of Sanguinius, but that the Baalites were seen as perfect candidates for the Angel's geneseed. I suggest a simple transition of time, time being something the W40k universe has lots of!

Say after Sang's finding all new Angel's were created from native Baalites, with the attrition rate under Space Marines, especially in the time of the Crusades, it does not take more then a decade or two for nearly all Blood Angels to be from Baal. That is nearly instantanious in the timeline of the W40k universe. And maybe, only those new marines called themselves Blood Angels at first, while the older 9th legion members did not refer to themselves in that name.

 

This explains both why a 'new' legion was created, as well as older fluff that the 9th legion was given to Sanguinius. In the unfathomable long timeline of 40k, small mistypings or unclear old writings can lead to misunderstandings about the scale and exact timeline of things occuring. This can also be used to explain slight inconsistencies, even if it is more speculation than actual lore source quoting. But when two quotes contradict, the speculations are worth a lot more I feel ;)

 

Just my 2 credits though.

unfortunately the discussion isn't about the timeline or the name of the legion. leonaides is dead set there not being ANY 9th legion or Blood Angels in any fashion before Sanguinius was found and that's the debate.

[Leonaides]

Ok,

 

Old Guns it is:

 

C:AoD, pg 12, col 1, para 3:

"The Emperors first act was to give Lion El'Johnson control fo the Dark Angels Legion. This body of Space Marines had been created by the Emperor from its Primarchs gene-stock and had fought alongside the other Imperial forces as teh Great Crusade was waged across the galaxy."

 

Compare and contrast with:

 

C:AoD, pg 18, col 2, para 4:

"The Emperor performed the complex operation that would extract teh geneseed from Sanguinius's genetic codes and he implanted 10,000 warriors with it. Thus were born the Blood Angels, among the Chapters of teh First Founding. They joined the Emperors fleet and sailed across the Sea of Stars to participate in teh Great Crusade."

 

Given that the first founding chapters at the time wer in fact legions, and that at the time the legion size was approx 10,000 not the 100,000 that seems to be slipping in from the Collected visions (discounted cos its black library not GW, remember), the above would seem to support my idea that there were no BA's prior to the Emperor meeting Sang. I have included the DA quote because it is a contemporary (in the same codex/edition/fluff regime) account of a Primarch being presented with his respective legion and written differently to the Blood Angel creation. the fact that they are different, I propose, is because the origins they describe are different. One legion clearly existed prior to the Primarch being found, and is noted as such, the other did not and was not.

 

Comments?

[BrotherMoses]

I have to agree with Leonaides that that sounds very much like we may not have existed until Sanguinius was found. The truth is shrouded in the mystery of the past.

 

@Brother Dev: I think you may have overreacted a bit here Brother and maybe even owe me an apology. I adopt the fluff that I like and ignore the rest just like I hope every single player does for their personal army.

 

If you wanted to know my personal playing habits then all you need do is ask:

 

I don't field furioso librarians. I'm not a fan of them fluffwise and I don't like them much rules wise either. I'm not a big fan of psykers, but I sometimes use them. My own personal fluff I prefer dreadnoughts not being capable of sorcery or psykery or whatever...

 

I have no problem using Seth. I DON'T use him because I'm not a Flesh Tearer

 

Astorath and Sanguinor: Use their rules if you like. Fluffwise they don't really exist to me.

 

I prefer to only have my elite infantry use jump packs. Veterans get that honour while my assault marines are usually mechanized. I do make exceptions like any good leader when needed, but in general, no.

 

I don't particularly think my Blood Angels auxilary needs/owns/uses a lot of Land Raiders. No problem with others using it.

 

Stormravens: I'm too lazy/untalented to convert. I guess the game is expanding to include more flyers. Nothing I can do about it. We've always known they've been there, just not part of the tabletop game. I expect to see more and more.

 

Captain Tycho: see my signature and 3rd edition fluff

 

Lemartes: see 3rd edition fluff

 

Chaplains: see 3rd edition fluff. BA chaplains concern themselves with the Death Company and the Black Rage. NOT the training of scouts.

 

Sanguinary Priests: There is a high priest. His name is Brother Corbulo. There are more priests though. Mostly they're concerned with trying to cure the Red Thirst/flaw. I see our priests having more to do with the scouts and training than Chaplains. After all, they're priests

 

Death Company: Death before Damnation!

 

Brother Corbulo: I prefer his older fluff. His rules are more awesome now.

 

Mephiston: He's over the top. His fluff is WAY over the top and Saturday morning cartoonish like the Sanguinor, but he's still cool. I just ignore the fluff again mostly

 

Sanguinary Guard: Hey, a Blood Angels sprue! Theres my captains bits! They look cool and could be fun to play, but I'm not a fan of their fluff either. Ignored. To me they're bits. Possibly a personal honour guard for Dante

 

Dante: All hail the Chapter Master Lord Dante.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Sorry about that.. it's just.. ugh.. I totally dislike dumb, short sighted and completely useless comments like that in a good fluff discussion thread like this..

 

Do you know how much of a hypocrite you sound? You are not the Law of the Internet to decry anothers opinion, nor are you empowered - except, perhaps, in your mind - to deny anothers input to this thread.

 

 

Older background is seen as more "pure", possibly because the more watered down, "lets make some money attitude", seems to pervade GW these days.

 

People who grew up with the glory days of the 2nd and 3rd will no doubt express there love of those eras, you have no right to deny them such.

[Brother-Captain Devlonir]

People who grew up with the glory days of the 2nd and 3rd will no doubt express there love of those eras, you have no right to deny them such.

 

Except that maybe.. I also grew up in those same days and gained my love for the Blood Angels from the first box set about the War of Armageddon.

 

And you are crossing a line when saying I am denying others input on this thread. And no BrotherMoses, you will not get an apology because your comment was so short sighted, just like your reponse now, that I will not apologize for pointing that out.

 

Also Juarez, do you really believe GW wasn't about making money back in the 90s?

 

It is the simple rule of long standing fantasy or sci fi settings, things change. Sometimes indeed because they want to make money, and sometimes because the owner of the lore (aka, GW) wants to change certain aspects of the lore because new ideas do not fit in otherwise.

If they really wanted to make money, Sang Guard and DC would have been awesomely strong and used in all tournament builds, and not situational like they are now. And Mephiston would have gotten a new model, not Lemartes.

 

That is also a very knee jerking geek response there: this fluff i loved was changed because the evil corporation wanted to make more money! Not everyone sees older fluff as more pure for the simple fact that old lore had a lot more gaps in it that wasn't filled yet untill new ideas came in.. And sometimes new ideas have to change old lore to fit, it happens..

 

I'm sorry.. just ugh.. You are of course very much free to play the game just the way you want it and focus your army around older lore than the current. But those remarks have no place in a thread about what the situation in the current lore is. That is the point I've been trying to make.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Ok,

 

Old Guns it is:

 

C:AoD, pg 12, col 1, para 3:

"The Emperors first act was to give Lion El'Johnson control fo the Dark Angels Legion. This body of Space Marines had been created by the Emperor from its Primarchs gene-stock and had fought alongside the other Imperial forces as teh Great Crusade was waged across the galaxy."

 

Compare and contrast with:

 

C:AoD, pg 18, col 2, para 4:

"The Emperor performed the complex operation that would extract teh geneseed from Sanguinius's genetic codes and he implanted 10,000 warriors with it. Thus were born the Blood Angels, among the Chapters of teh First Founding. They joined the Emperors fleet and sailed across the Sea of Stars to participate in teh Great Crusade."

 

Given that the first founding chapters at the time wer in fact legions, and that at the time the legion size was approx 10,000 not the 100,000 that seems to be slipping in from the Collected visions (discounted cos its black library not GW, remember), the above would seem to support my idea that there were no BA's prior to the Emperor meeting Sang. I have included the DA quote because it is a contemporary (in the same codex/edition/fluff regime) account of a Primarch being presented with his respective legion and written differently to the Blood Angel creation. the fact that they are different, I propose, is because the origins they describe are different. One legion clearly existed prior to the Primarch being found, and is noted as such, the other did not and was not.

 

Comments?

seeing as how during the time there were no set legion sizes, he very well could have implanted 10,000 Baalites with Sanguinius' geneseed, that however does not mean that there was no IX Legion before Sanguinius was found.

[Leonaides]

and for the other bit- the comparison between the da's who are clearly stated as being given to lion as an existing legion, as opposed to the ba's where it says nothing of the sort? Or are you now willing to agree that it is not such a clear-cut situation as you first said?

[Brother-Captain Devlonir]

and for the other bit- the comparison between the da's who are clearly stated as being given to lion as an existing legion, as opposed to the ba's where it says nothing of the sort? Or are you now willing to agree that it is not such a clear-cut situation as you first said?

 

I agree it is not clear cut, but the combination of legion number, time when Sanguinius was found and the relatively small number of 10.000 Baalites being infused does give the impression (but not clear, i repeat again) that the Baalites were added to an already existing legion.

And as I said before, with the known attrition under Space Marines as well as the fact only Baal was where new recruits were drafted, in no time nearly the entire legion would be Baalites and of Sanguinius' old tribe.

 

Still.. I agree that it is not clear cut, but then again.. what do you expect with records more than thousands of years old ;-) It's not like we know every detail of Ancient Greece or Egypt now do we?

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Ok,

 

Old Guns it is:

 

C:AoD, pg 12, col 1, para 3:

"The Emperors first act was to give Lion El'Johnson control fo the Dark Angels Legion. This body of Space Marines had been created by the Emperor from its Primarchs gene-stock and had fought alongside the other Imperial forces as teh Great Crusade was waged across the galaxy."

 

Compare and contrast with:

 

C:AoD, pg 18, col 2, para 4:

"The Emperor performed the complex operation that would extract teh geneseed from Sanguinius's genetic codes and he implanted 10,000 warriors with it. Thus were born the Blood Angels, among the Chapters of teh First Founding. They joined the Emperors fleet and sailed across the Sea of Stars to participate in teh Great Crusade."

 

Given that the first founding chapters at the time wer in fact legions, and that at the time the legion size was approx 10,000 not the 100,000 that seems to be slipping in from the Collected visions (discounted cos its black library not GW, remember), the above would seem to support my idea that there were no BA's prior to the Emperor meeting Sang. I have included the DA quote because it is a contemporary (in the same codex/edition/fluff regime) account of a Primarch being presented with his respective legion and written differently to the Blood Angel creation. the fact that they are different, I propose, is because the origins they describe are different. One legion clearly existed prior to the Primarch being found, and is noted as such, the other did not and was not.

 

Comments?

seeing as how during the time there were no set legion sizes, he very well could have implanted 10,000 Baalites with Sanguinius' geneseed, that however does not mean that there was no IX Legion before Sanguinius was found.

 

I'd say it implies - vaguely - that there was a Legion before, a differnt Legion who would become the Blood Angels.

[Brother Nathan]

Surely if you were the emperor and planned to make a legion for each of your sons you would want to test ou the genetics on turning men to marines using each of their geneseds just t be sure it would work. Otherwise you could turn up with most of your sons having great warriors and promising the very same for each son tento find out they arnt compatable or were a malfunction etc... Having asmall amount of marines for each legion would also help with setting up of each legion as they would have already had experiance and knowledge that they would happily pass to their leaders that marines of oter legions may have been less happy to have done.

[Leonaides]

see proto-marines during the wars of unification on terra. And the big E spent several hundred years developing/collecting the genes to make the primarchs, i guess he might just have done some compatibility tests then. In any case, thats now straying a long way from fluff into real life suggestions and reasoning.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

i never said it was clear cut, all i said is that there was a IX Legion before Sanguinius was found.

 

don't you think it's strange that so many people had never heard of your version of events until this topic was started?

[banis]

I thought the fluff was pretty clear about this. The number of the legion is the number off which it was created. This is why the Dark angels where the first one made and also have legion number 1.

[Judaz]

Another thing that leans towards that the Blood Angels (or the IX legion) existed before Sanguinius is the lines in our codex that says: "...and he implanted it into the warriors of the Blood Angels Legion. Thus were the Blood Angels and their Primarch finally made whole."

To me it's quite clear that he already had some sons that were without their father (primarch) and then they were made whole when The E found Sanguinius. It even says that the IX legion was called Blood Angels before Sanguinius.

 

The 1st legion and the 15th legion longed for their primarch, why should the 9th legion be any different? They were finally made whole. The word finally implies that they had waited a long time for their primarch.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Another thing that leans towards that the Blood Angels (or the IX legion) existed before Sanguinius is the lines in our codex that says: "...and he implanted it into the warriors of the Blood Angels Legion. Thus were the Blood Angels and their Primarch finally made whole."

To me it's quite clear that he already had some sons that were without their father (primarch) and then they were made whole when The E found Sanguinius. It even says that the IX legion was called Blood Angels before Sanguinius.

 

The 1st legion and the 15th legion longed for their primarch, why should the 9th legion be any different? They were finally made whole. The word finally implies that they had waited a long time for their primarch.

no, they weren't the blood angels until sanguinius renamed them after his adoptive tribe and himself. only a few of the legions had actual names beyond their legion number until their primarch named them

[Grimtooth]

Leonaidas,

 

The reference you keep bringing up about the best warriors of Baal being implanted while others were left behind to defend.

 

I am not sure you are aware, but most of the Primarchs found, had risen to respective leadership ranks on their adopted homeworlds. In the case of Russ, aka The Wolf King before being discovered by the Emperor, some of his most loyal warriors refused to leave his side and demanded that the Emperor make them into Space Wolves to join the Legion, despite being too old. Only a handful actually survived.

 

Another instance I can think of would be the Dark Angels and Lion El'Johnson and some of his most trusted warriors wanted to become Dark Angels. They instead only received some augmentation to serve in the Dark Angels Legion.

 

I think that this is what is being referenced and then symbolized in the quote you keep referencing. Once discovered, Sanguinous was leading his "people" against the mutants. His warriors wanted to follow their leader as Space Marines and thus were implanted with the geneseed of Sanguinous. Once both them and Sanguinous were united with the IX Legion, then they symbolically became the Blood Angels Legion in its entirety.

[Grimtooth]

Ok,

 

Old Guns it is:

 

C:AoD, pg 12, col 1, para 3:

"The Emperors first act was to give Lion El'Johnson control fo the Dark Angels Legion. This body of Space Marines had been created by the Emperor from its Primarchs gene-stock and had fought alongside the other Imperial forces as teh Great Crusade was waged across the galaxy."

 

Compare and contrast with:

 

C:AoD, pg 18, col 2, para 4:

"The Emperor performed the complex operation that would extract teh geneseed from Sanguinius's genetic codes and he implanted 10,000 warriors with it. Thus were born the Blood Angels, among the Chapters of teh First Founding. They joined the Emperors fleet and sailed across the Sea of Stars to participate in teh Great Crusade."

 

Given that the first founding chapters at the time wer in fact legions, and that at the time the legion size was approx 10,000 not the 100,000 that seems to be slipping in from the Collected visions (discounted cos its black library not GW, remember), the above would seem to support my idea that there were no BA's prior to the Emperor meeting Sang. I have included the DA quote because it is a contemporary (in the same codex/edition/fluff regime) account of a Primarch being presented with his respective legion and written differently to the Blood Angel creation. the fact that they are different, I propose, is because the origins they describe are different. One legion clearly existed prior to the Primarch being found, and is noted as such, the other did not and was not.

 

Comments?

 

First of all, I see no difference between the two emboldened parts above. One just names the Primarch while another references the Primarch.

 

Secondly, check the last sentence of the second quoted passage that I emboldened. The 10,000 warriors joined the Emperor in the Great Crusade. It says nothing of Sanguinous being there. It doesnt even refer to Sanguinous, only his genetic code which he already had in his possession since he created him in the first place.

[Leonaides]

@judaz... See earlier post where i pointed out that your interpretation would mean that the existing marines of the ix legion would end up being re-implanted with a second set of geneseed. Sorry, i disagree. @rameses, so its actually talking about something completely different happening, but refering to it in a symbolic way, which allows you to pick a theory out of what amounts to whole cloth/supposition and extrapolation rather than what it actually says? Respectfully, thats called wishful thinking where i come from.

[Leonaides]

rameses... That second quote is talking about what happened when the emperor met sang on baal... Does that alter your interpretation, or should i say that, in that case nothing in the bit you highlighted actually mentions via ba's so it must be talking about a different legion entirely...

[Judaz]

Well Leonaides, I guess your english is a bit better than mine so you problably have an advantage over me in the whole interpretation of said texts. :wacko:

I'd say it's still open enough to be both ways. Since we are having a discussion about it, it's hard to say what's right and what's wrong. You read into it what you already think you know. We have to wait for BL to (write) release our Heresy book before we know for sure.

[Leonaides]

You read into it what you already think you know.

And thats probably the best way to end this whole thing. Its not as black and white as was originally said, but there are conflicting sources.