Prospero Burns

[Piousservant]

I agree with you entirely. But that quote isn't from my, or your, POV.

[Gree]

Small quote from another review

 

 

“‘The Sixth Legion Astartes has a reputation,’ said Bear.

 

‘All the Legions Astartes have reputations,’ replied Hawser.

 

‘Not like ours,’ said Ogvai. ‘We are known for our ferocity. We are thought to be feral and undisciplined. Even our brother Legions consider us to be wild and bestial.’

 

‘And you’re not?’ asked Hawser.

 

‘If we need to be,’ said Ogvai. ‘But if that was our natural state, we’d all be dead by now.’

 

He leaned down towards Hawser like a parent addressing a child.

 

‘It takes a vast amount of self control to be this dangerous,’ he said.”

 

No offense, but I have a hard time believing that when we have the World Eaters Legion. The Wolves can't be considered anymore wild and bestial than the World Eaters.

[CainTheHunter]

Small quote from another review

 

 

“‘The Sixth Legion Astartes has a reputation,’ said Bear.

 

‘All the Legions Astartes have reputations,’ replied Hawser.

 

‘Not like ours,’ said Ogvai. ‘We are known for our ferocity. We are thought to be feral and undisciplined. Even our brother Legions consider us to be wild and bestial.’

 

‘And you’re not?’ asked Hawser.

 

‘If we need to be,’ said Ogvai. ‘But if that was our natural state, we’d all be dead by now.’

 

He leaned down towards Hawser like a parent addressing a child.

 

‘It takes a vast amount of self control to be this dangerous,’ he said.”

 

No offense, but I have a hard time believing that when we have the World Eaters Legion. The Wolves can't be considered anymore wild and bestial than the World Eaters.

 

Its about control of inner beast - something that is entirely non-existent in the WE Legion.

[Gree]

Small quote from another review

 

 

“‘The Sixth Legion Astartes has a reputation,’ said Bear.

 

‘All the Legions Astartes have reputations,’ replied Hawser.

 

‘Not like ours,’ said Ogvai. ‘We are known for our ferocity. We are thought to be feral and undisciplined. Even our brother Legions consider us to be wild and bestial.’

 

‘And you’re not?’ asked Hawser.

 

‘If we need to be,’ said Ogvai. ‘But if that was our natural state, we’d all be dead by now.’

 

He leaned down towards Hawser like a parent addressing a child.

 

‘It takes a vast amount of self control to be this dangerous,’ he said.”

 

No offense, but I have a hard time believing that when we have the World Eaters Legion. The Wolves can't be considered anymore wild and bestial than the World Eaters.

 

Its about control of inner beast - something that is entirely non-existent in the WE Legion.

 

Then would't that make them less bestial in the eyes of other Legions? I'm not talking about if the Space Wolves really are more bestial or not. I'm talking how the other Legions view them. I have a hard time believing that other Legions consider them to be the wild and bestial when we have Angron and his murder-machines running around.

 

 

The way the passage has it, only the Wolves are conisdered like that. Although I may be taking it out of context. (I have not read the book myself)

 

[CainTheHunter]

The way the passage has it, only the Wolves are conisdered like that. Although I may be taking it out of context. (I have not read the book myself)

 

 

Neither have I, but it is supposed to be on page 190. But for sure this book is shaping and changing the fluff to the extent possible and even beyond. And these leaked spoilers serve as the best marketing tool ever, since I want to read this book badly :(

[calgar101]

Definition of BESTIAL. 1. a: of or relating to beasts b: resembling a beast . 2. a: lacking intelligence or reason b: marked by base or inhuman instincts or desires : brutal

 

That is one definition of bestial I found. The other legions would view the World Eaters as butchers because of what they did; massacring innocent civilians for example. However the Wolves could be viewed as bestial due to their affinity with Wolves and other Fenrisian beasts. Remember that each Space Wolf harbours a beast within; the Wulfen.

[Brother Captain Kezef]

The World Eaters are a very Human form of savagery, they are pyschopaths who have no remorseor feelings for what they do, they just kill and kill.

 

The Wolves are animalistic, tribal and that makes them more bstial. To any observer there would be a distinct difference between the wolves and the world eaters.

[Scribe]

One killing because its part of its natural tendency. The other killing because it WANTS to kill you. Perhaps...

[Trel]

I agree, the Blood Angels and Raven Guard also had reputations as being particularly blood-thirsty, the White Scars were regarded as sub-civilized savages.

The World Eaters had the reputation of butchers who take a pathological joy in violence but still within the bounds of self-control. The World Eaters' reputation didn't say they lost control, it said that they were always entirely aware of the blood they were spilling.

 

The reputation of the Wolves-as-beasts doesn't speak to their battlefield savagery so much as it denotes a lack of self-control. i.e. when the Wolves are unleashed, there is no calling them back.

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

No offense, but I have a hard time believing that when we have the World Eaters Legion. The Wolves can't be considered anymore wild and bestial than the World Eaters.

 

There's a marked difference between something you know you plucked from the wild that's chosen to wear a thin veneer of civilization to curb its instinctual fight or flight routine, and something that's never had any concept of bothering to choose civilization because they find it boring or wimpy. At its core, a dog is a wolf that's learned to get along with its neighbors until provoked; a shark has never seen the need to and so it doesn't.

[CainTheHunter]

The reputation of the Wolves-as-beasts doesn't speak to their battlefield savagery so much as it denotes a lack of self-control. i.e. when the Wolves are unleashed, there is no calling them back.

 

Mr Abnett suggests otherwise, and that is interesting though. Still, I agree that the quote is given outside of the general context and we have to read the entire book.

[Gree]

The World Eaters had the reputation of butchers who take a pathological joy in violence but still within the bounds of self-control. The World Eaters' reputation didn't say they lost control, it said that they were always entirely aware of the blood they were spilling.

 

Actually I don't ever recall World Eaters having that much control over their rampages.

[Trel]

The reputation of the Wolves-as-beasts doesn't speak to their battlefield savagery so much as it denotes a lack of self-control. i.e. when the Wolves are unleashed, there is no calling them back.

 

Mr Abnett suggests otherwise, and that is interesting though. Still, I agree that the quote is given outside of the general context and we have to read the entire book.

 

My bad, I was unclear. I was speaking to reputation and perception as opposed to fact. Naturally, the Wolves carefully manage their own reputation and the truth of self-control probably varies from Marine to Marine.

[Scribe]

The World Eaters had the reputation of butchers who take a pathological joy in violence but still within the bounds of self-control. The World Eaters' reputation didn't say they lost control, it said that they were always entirely aware of the blood they were spilling.

 

Actually I don't ever recall World Eaters having that much control over their rampages.

 

Thats missing the point, the World Eaters didnt want to do anything but rampage and butcher. It doesnt show a lack of self control if you are simply following through on your intent in the first place.

[calgar101]

The World Eaters and Space Wolves were different sides of the same coin in my opinion.

[Gree]

The World Eaters had the reputation of butchers who take a pathological joy in violence but still within the bounds of self-control. The World Eaters' reputation didn't say they lost control, it said that they were always entirely aware of the blood they were spilling.

 

Actually I don't ever recall World Eaters having that much control over their rampages.

 

Thats missing the point, the World Eaters didnt want to do anything but rampage and butcher. It doesnt show a lack of self control if you are simply following through on your intent in the first place.

 

But did they go into battle with any other intent though?

[Scribe]

Not in my opinion. They where censured prior to Angron's involvment, and it only went further from that point.

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

Not in my opinion. They where censured prior to Angron's involvment, and it only went further from that point.

 

Source for that? The only recorded censuring of the World Eaters in my knowledge was after Angron's arrival, and it was over the lobotomization procedures he enforced.

[Trel]

I don't think the World Eaters ever went in expecting that rapid, strategic deployment would end a battle quickly and with a minimum of casualties on both sides. (After all, a dead man makes a poor Imperial citizen, amirite?)

 

The World Eaters, and the Warhounds before them, went into battle knowing that diplomacy had failed and that a massive purge of the population was needed if anything is going to be salvaged for the Imperium.

[Scribe]

Not in my opinion. They where censured prior to Angron's involvment, and it only went further from that point.

 

Source for that? The only recorded censuring of the World Eaters in my knowledge was after Angron's arrival, and it was over the lobotomization procedures he enforced.

 

After Desh'ea - Khârn recalling a censuring after they killed off some Imperial Guard that had somehow compromised their honor I believe it was.

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

Not in my opinion. They where censured prior to Angron's involvment, and it only went further from that point.

 

Source for that? The only recorded censuring of the World Eaters in my knowledge was after Angron's arrival, and it was over the lobotomization procedures he enforced.

 

After Desh'ea - Khârn recalling a censuring after they killed off some Imperial Guard that had somehow compromised their honor I believe it was.

 

Thanks! I think I completely missed that bit. Gonna go re-read it now. :)

[Dark Mechanicum]

It wasn't a censoring per say. It was more a light chastisement in killing their allies that ran. Not many commissars in the Imperial Army yet but definitely something to worry about. The only official censoring of the World Eaters is the use of the mind implants, and of their reputation to slaughter whole civilizations for saying no.

 

Interestingly enough: the Word Bearers do the same thing in destroying a whole planet's civilization but are lauded for it.

 

On the Space Wolves and their savagery: They don't stop. There is nothing to stop them once they are slipped off their leash.

The World Eaters could be stopped if directly ordered which does in some cases.

[Culebras]

This seems to provide evidence to support a theory I have had. If we take this new information at face value, it implies that the Emperor either pre-selected or allowed the Primarchs to assume specific roles in the imperial army (intelligence, siege, assault, enforcer, etc.) with an eye to fulfilling a deliberate role in the great crusade.

 

In this case you have charismatic primarchs like Lorgar and Guilliman, intended to win over populations with words, heavy firepower primarchs and their legions like the Iron warriors or Imperial fists, for taking out heavily defended planets, and shock troopers like the Night Lords and the World Eaters, meant to intimidate planets into surrendering.

 

This may explain the Emperor's actions with regard to Angron if he wanted Angron's forces to function as the Emperor's executioner, but Angron's rebellion and hostility made him unreliable for that purpose. Luckily, he had a back up in Russ.

 

If I had to name one aspect of the Emperor that Russ and the space wolves represent, It would have to be Dutiful Emperor. The Space Wolves make sense as the one legion the Emperor could trust to destroy a fellow legion, something I don't see Angron's World Eaters fufilling. Angron represents, for me, the aspect of the Wrathful Emperor.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I kinda dislike the whole "Russ as the executioner, that the Wolves do what any other Legion would balk at", when we have the World Eaters and Night Lords. what situations are there that the World Eaters would balk at, and given that Russ is known to have

disagreed with the destruction of the two missing Primarchs, and fought against the same happening to Lorgar

, I doubt that he's the 'perfect' executioner. Good, yes, but Magnus seems to have been the only Primarch ordered to be destroyed that he's agreed with the order. Surely Night Haunter, with his ultimate pragmatism, and willingness to do whatever was necessary, would be a much, much better fit for the executioner-role amongst the Primarchs.

Hell, I'd always felt that, similar to the Dornian Heresy, the Night Lords would have taken on a role similar to the Inquisition if they'd stayed loyal.

[Gree]

I kinda dislike the whole "Russ as the executioner, that the Wolves do what any other Legion would balk at", when we have the World Eaters and Night Lords. what situations are there that the World Eaters would balk at, and given that Russ is known to have

disagreed with the destruction of the two missing Primarchs, and fought against the same happening to Lorgar

, I doubt that he's the 'perfect' executioner. Good, yes, but Magnus seems to have been the only Primarch ordered to be destroyed that he's agreed with the order. Surely Night Haunter, with his ultimate pragmatism, and willingness to do whatever was necessary, would be a much, much better fit for the executioner-role amongst the Primarchs.

Hell, I'd always felt that, similar to the Dornian Heresy, the Night Lords would have taken on a role similar to the Inquisition if they'd stayed loyal.

 

I agree, but for different reasons. I dislike the whole concept of an ''Executioner Legion'' because to me, it smacks too much of ''My Legion/chapter/army is better than yours''. And I've already had enough of that with Ward.