Codex vs Black Libarary

[Hrvat]

Hail brethren!

 

 

I am currently working on a DIY Dark Angel successor chapter and for that reason went to re-read all the background about them I have. What I have found was a rather uncomfortable difference in how DA can be percieved by a person interested in them.

 

My first contact with the DA was way back in May 1999 when their 3rd ed. codex was released along with articles in UK WD 235. The theme of the chapter appealed to me greatly. The theme of secrecy, betrayl and great virtue and valour captured my imagination. Some months later I acquiered UK WD 231 with its article about Cypher and the Fallen. Everything was grand. DA were the virtuous chapter with a dark past but one willing to go to any length do wright that ancient wrong. This theme continued later in the IA: DA in UK WD 254 and in the Heroes&Villians: Cypher in UK WD 281 and then a few months later Angels of Darkness came that threw a spanner into that great picture and suddenly much of the apeal for DA (at least for me) was swept away. Later books concerning HH (Descent of Angles, Tales of Heresy and Fallen Angels) though changeing two opposite black and white portrayls of DA made things only worse. Sure the DA were great fighters but the portrayl of Lion and characters taking part in the Fall just made me dislike the DA, which is a shame since background from the Codex is so inspirating. The worst part is that after reading Fallen Angels I can really put myself into the shooes of marines on Caliban. I am come from a background not that dissimillar from the Knightly Orders of Caliban and the world around me is experiencing changes that are destroying our past and our traditions. From what I could understand in the books it seams the Fall will be made of Luther and his marines using Chaos against Lion and his marines opposing that Chaos. Lion will be furious at Luther for using chaos, the very thing he tried to keep them ignorant off to protect Caliban from Imperial retribution and tragedy will occure. So in the end I guess we will end with a tragic story without clear heroes and villians and those that should be heroes will later comit acts of villany to capture those that should be villians.

 

These days when kids come to our gaming group and ask question about this and that. Most in the begining chose DA because of the official codex story (betrayel and internal strife we as people can easily relate to) but when they learn more they drift away and call those that with DA traitors. The worst part is as the non Codex story spreads among the youngbloods it is simplified and DA just turn into another traitoures chapter with a "lame" codex. During the 3rd edition there were 7 DA players in our area now there is only me occasionaly taking Deathwing to the field.

 

I believe that GW has destroyed what it means to be a Dark Angel with the stories published by the Black Library and have erevocably damaged the DA fan base and their perception in public. Combine that with the recent injection of awsomness to the Blood Angels, Space Wolves and all those mentioned in Codex Space Marines it is no wonder DA comunity has been reduced to several hundred diehards scatered across the globe.

 

 

I needed to get that of my chest.

 

 

For the Lion brothers and damn the Black Library*!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*damn xeno machinations

[Master Ipharion]

Hi.

 

Well, I dont know what you have. The Dark Angels were always a sinister chapter. The books just try to give an explanation why things happened that way. Thats at least my opinion on it.

 

Concerning canonicity of Black Library-books:

You opened a can of worms with this question. Internetfolks debated about it since 40k-forums exist. From GWs point the

BL-books are canon, even if they are outdated ("Squats") or and out of 40k-lore (ever read the Blood Angel-novels?).

But i wouldnt say, that they override the current codex.

 

I judge BL-novels usually book by book. At first they are stories about some events in the world of 40k: Some are well researched and fit seamlessy into known lore, others are shoehorned into 40k by foreign writers. For me the best way is to tread this texts like medieval chronicles or old legends: There might be a core of truth behind a story, but that does not mean that all aspects of the story are true.

 

Only for internetpurposes i take everything as canon: We need some base for our speculations and Black Library is unfortunatly one of the few sources we have concerning the lore of 40k.

 

I hope that helps,

 

Ipharion

[Alys Dwr]

History is recorded by the victor, even if it is then kept a secret for 10,000 years.

 

I like the BL books for the DA. I don't see them as throwing a spanner in the works. The books give us a perspective and direction for how half the legion turned from the Lion, but it is all as Zaharael perceived it. He didn't have the full picture, only what he had observed and he made decisions based on that. We don't know why the Lion sent half the legion home but we do know that a feeling of betrayal was rife.

 

I think the stories fit well into our background. Normally stories focus on the good guys and all the wonder they achieve. Descent of Angels and Fallen Angels have a strong focus on the actions of the bad guys. I think this is very cleverly done as it reduces the chance that it'll all be contradicted by any new fluff produced for the next codex.

 

Al

[Legatus]

I found this a while ago. It is from the Afterword to the book by Gav Thorpe and adresses that one line that has a large number of people go off on the iodea that the Dark Angels are really traitors. I assume it is from later printings, as I do not have the book myself, and the majority of people that have read it seem to be unaware of this:

 

All of which brings me to the end of this Afterword, save for one more shocking revelation. The part most-quoted from Angels of Darkness is probably:

 

’What was he waiting for?' Boreas asked quietly.

Astelan looked into Boreas’s eyes, read the curiosity that was now there.

'He was waiting to see which side won, of course.'

 

It’s been a source of great interest and amusement to see just how much this has been simultaneously reviled and rejoiced. The cherished convictions of thousands were shaken by this dubious revelation. It fundamentally sums up the equivocation and secret agendas of the Dark Angels. But the thing is; I never planned it at all. It just came out as I was writing that scene. I remember it well, because I stopped dead in my tracks, hands hovering comically over the keyboard, and read it out aloud to myself. Wow, I thought, that’s really going to get people talking.

So, everything else aside, perhaps that’s the greatest achievement of Angels of Darkness - it even managed to shock me!

 

As you can see from Gavin's own words, he never intended to retcon the Dark Angels into really being traitors. It was a cute little idea he got spontaneously while writing that scene. A little bit of conspiracy theory.

While the Lion and his Dark Angels approached Terra, where had Astelan been? He had been on Caliban. So why would he know that? He wouldn't. And he admits that all of that is his personal theory from what he had heard. He had not heared noble stories about how the Dark Angels were defending the palace (because they were not on terra at that time). And he assumed that the Lion had a dark agenda. So he put two and two together and figured that the reason for why the stories do not mention how the Dark Angels were not fighting on Terra was because their Primarch was purposefully not attacking. Well, Astelan was mistaken.

 

Here is what's NOT going to happen: GW describing in a Codex how that faction is loyal and fighting for the Imperium, and then in a completely different source (not officially sold by GW) they are explaining that the faction actually are traitors. Anyone honestly believing that this is how it works, the Codex explaining what the faction is about but that being completely invalidated and contradicted by an outside source, is not really thinking things through.

[Octavulg]

More to the point, even if Astelan is correct, the Lion's AWOL, and we have no particular reason to believe he told his subordinates why he was waiting. The Dark Angels could be completely ignorant of all this.

[Captain Idaho]

These days when kids come to our gaming group and ask question about this and that. Most in the begining chose DA because of the official codex story (betrayel and internal strife we as people can easily relate to) but when they learn more they drift away and call those that with DA traitors. The worst part is as the non Codex story spreads among the youngbloods it is simplified and DA just turn into another traitoures chapter with a "lame" codex.

 

It happens all the time to Ultramarines fans. People get the wrong end of the stick or listen to the internet critism of your favourite Chapter without knowing the facts themselve and bam, the ignorance spreads :P

 

Don't worry about it! It is annoying sometimes when people don't get the point in literary terms, but look at it a different way. If everyone and their dog collects your army then you just become one of the herd, but if you are one of a select few loyal followers you can feel special.

 

Personally, after lengthy discussions with Octavulg, I came to embrace the ambiguous nature of background history of a Chapter (cheers Octavulg) and reduced my own stubbornly narrow minded viewpoint to one that looks at many different possible solutions. I choose those I like and which fit to me, but I bear in mind that the truth can be much more sinister or twisted than we considered previous.

 

Politely point out your viewpoint, why this is the case through a series of published material, and if the irritant persists then simple declare your recultance to waste your time teaching those who do not want to be taught, then walk away.

 

Sure I still get frustrated when someone is blatantly wrong about something, but as an adult human being, I reserve the ability to ignore the individual with extreme prejudice! :D

 

***Edit:**** With regards to the BL fiction, personally I class it as cannon with common sense. If something went miles away from the fluff then I put it down to the author and literacy creativity and ignore it as best I can. Things like Assault Cannons in the HH novels was just an author who didn't realise and thought it sounded cooler to have the weapon on his Dreadnought. I can ignore it.

 

HH fiction may throw what you believe about your favourite Chapter upside down, but embrace it! It's interesting and adds much needed depth to our fictional universe.

 

The Space Wolves fans went balistic at the suggestion that the Wolves of Fenris are genetic creations, potentially from the orignal settlers. They argued vehemently in the Space Wolves forum that such a thing was outrageous and rubbish. They couldn't handle the fact their favourite Chapter might not be as pure as they liked to think, having more in common with the Thousand Sons than they wanted to accept.

 

They also hated the fact the Wolfen gene might not be entirely part of the geneseed, or that the savagary of the Space Wolves was down to the people of Fenris having tampered DNA. They ignored the source of these suggestions with ferocity, even when Russ was said to be putting on his savagary as a mask.

 

Yet I felt that it was an over reaction and actually made the Space Wolves interesting to me for the first time ever.

[Prokrustes]

Wow...I think this is my first post on the loyalist side....ever! *shudders*

Anyway, after reading through this thread I felt like commenting (not necessarily something extremly meaningful) but I, for one, was very glad to find the quote (mentioned in this thread) that indicates that the Lion has been waiting for a victor to emerge during the Siege of Terra. It made him a) much more special than most primarchs and B ) so lovely medieval feudal lord like (I mean RL medieval and not movie medieval). This particular piece of fluff makes the DA the coolest loyalists, because they arent truly loyal...but they arent true traitors either. They are following their own agenda at all costs.

 

Concerning fluff sources Id say Codex before BL however BL tends to fill out open spaces and BL sometimes is utterly rubbish which has to be ignored (C.S unnamable I look at you!). I mean Im not fond of the idea that Fulgrim was possessed by his sword or that Ferrus Manus is definately dead and not presumably dead but well....if you are too selective which fluff you allow or disallow it will be hard to find a common ground with other players.

[brennus]

Anything attributed to Astelan is something I take with a grain of salt. As a terran-born marine who disobeyed orders (Call of the Lion) and was basically exiled to Caliban by the Lion, it's safe to assume that Astelan is a little bitter.