Is it just me?

[Brother Captain Gladius]

But its like any good story, they start off with the background, telling how these mighty warriers and their legions were tempted, and for what reason, the whole 'not really a bad guy, but misunderstood' thing. exploring the fall of the traiter legions has to be the main focal point of the whole story. Once they have the two sides set, they have the bad guys winning as it makes the ultimate end victory for good so much sweeter. If we think that there are at least 5/6 more books on their way (maybe more if sales keep up) then we will see more of the good fighting off the bad and eventually prevailing.

 

I think withthe way things are going, there will be a blood angels, ultramarines, whitescars and fists novel in time, culminating in the seige of big T.

[Valkyrion]

The books are bound to be more chaos centric. We knew that 9 legions turned against the emperor, but didn't fully know why. Why do we need to know why the 9 loyal legions remained loyal? There's only so much 'well, he is the Emperor after all' that a book can preach.

 

Like the film Alien, or even Aliens. You have everyone pulling together against a common threat until they are ultimately betrayed. Why are they betrayed and why does the betrayer betray them? Thats where the story is. A bit of a flimsy example but you hopefully get my point. There is no story in learning why Ripley didn't betray anyone, the story is why she was betrayed.

 

Oh, and Chaos definitely wins/won/is winning/has won/will win, depending on the time. Abaddon hasn't failed, he's doing more than Horus ever did.

[Clewz]

I think withthe way things are going, there will be a blood angels, ultramarines, whitescars and fists novel in time, culminating in the seige of big T.

 

part of me hopes they wont do this legion because they'll more than likely get Andy Hoare to do it and that makes me sad inside

[Valkyrion]

Did Andy Hoare do the Voldorius book? It's taken me a week to get through the first chapter. It's hardly a page turner is it? Like Rynn's World, it seems very poorly written.

[Clewz]

Did Andy Hoare do the Voldorius book? It's taken me a week to get through the first chapter. It's hardly a page turner is it? Like Rynn's World, it seems very poorly written.

 

Yeah he's the one whos responsible. Easily the worst bl novel I've read.

[Brother Captain Gladius]

Volodorious gets better towards the end, nice cameo from the ravens, but not a great book by any standard. However the WS's need to be talked about, the spaceport battle was a big deal, and they employ slightly different tactics to the others. Also think the Kahn will kick ass! and as for the worst BL book ever, slightly off topic, but the blood ravens thing with GS Goto was awful!

[Clewz]

Volodorious gets better towards the end, nice cameo from the ravens, but not a great book by any standard. However the WS's need to be talked about, the spaceport battle was a big deal, and they employ slightly different tactics to the others. Also think the Kahn will kick ass! and as for the worst BL book ever, slightly off topic, but the blood ravens thing with GS Goto was awful!

 

its a close call but I still think voldorius tops it. I thought it was the other way round though, started off ok but quickly bellyflopped.

I was close to flinging it on the floor in the tube when I got to the point when the AL Champion was shooting at Kor'sarro at point blank range and somehow kept missing his exposed head.

 

Ok fair enough its sci fi but that was just stupid

 

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Did Andy Hoare do the Voldorius book? It's taken me a week to get through the first chapter. It's hardly a page turner is it? Like Rynn's World, it seems very poorly written.

 

Yeah he's the one whos responsible. Easily the worst bl novel I've read.

 

Ah, how little you know young Padawan ^_^

[Brother Captain Gladius]

Who did the White Scars in Legends, sure that wasnt AH?

[Midgard]

Who did the White Scars in Legends, sure that wasnt AH?

 

That was Mitchell Scanlon, the author of "Descent of Angels". Personally, I thought the short story there was higher quality than "Hunt for Voldorius", and the fact was further accentuated by the novel tie-ins in the short story. It makes me wonder what Scanlon would have been able to do with "Hunt for Voldorius" if he wrote it.

 

But then, I actually liked "Descent of Angels" (at least, in my opinion, it was a good SF/fantasy story, perhaps less so of a good Horus Heresy novel), so what am I supposed to know...

[Valkyrion]

Descent of Angels was a decent book - it was well written and the characters were well portrayed - it was just a bit...unneccesary, for want of a better word.

 

DoA is a book that gets better the more you read it - almost like at first read you think 'what is HH about this?' and 'what was the point of that?'.

 

But then it turns out that we've got the first recorded mention of a Librarian in training, a indigenous perspective on the Emperor and the crusade, the mystery of the watches and so on. DoA is actually a better book than people give it credit for, but you can get away without reading it to no detriment to the rest of the series. I think that is peoples beef with it, more than anything.

[Aegnor]

Yeah, agree re DoA being ok. The biggest flaws with it was that it interrupted the pretty good momentum the HH had up to that point and it ended on a too abrupt cliff hanger. As you said, on the re-read, with the series having moved on, and knowing there's a second book, address those concerns. Certainly still a cut above some of the poorer, non-HH, BL books.

[Dave the Twisted]

My theory is that the books are so Pro Chaos because that's exactly how Chaos wants it. I mean, they corrupted a full half of the Primarchs, so clearly they're more than able to sway a world of 6 billion to the ruinous powers. The only reason we've spotted it is because they aren't even trying their hardest yet.

[Captain Idaho]

My theory is that the books are so Pro Chaos because that's exactly how Chaos wants it. I mean, they corrupted a full half of the Primarchs, so clearly they're more than able to sway a world of 6 billion to the ruinous powers. The only reason we've spotted it is because they aren't even trying their hardest yet.

 

:D

 

A theory unlikely to get much purchase in the 40K community. After all, it relies on the fact the Chaos Gods are real, the Earth is in the 40K universe and GW and the Black Library is under the perfidious influence of the Chaos Gods...

[dragon950]

I believe that they are telling the history of the HH, like all history it's not meant to be put into a good or bad kind of light. It just depends on the POV from someone in the story and who is reading it. I actually like both of the DA books, they rated higher with me than Legion and equal with Prospero Burns.

 

As for hunt for Voldoris, it was much better than Rynn's world. Parts of it may have been hard to get through, but I did like about reading the tatics that both the WS and the RG used in campaigns. It also did add some much needed lore to great founding chapters that have been left out of C:SM.

 

I would like for BL to release another book for SWs that told about them heading towards Terra, getting attacked by the AL and reinforced by the DAs (I believe that was how it went, hard to remember when I've read different versions), and then both legions making there way back to Terra while stoping to save imperial worlds under attack by cultists. Would be nice to have some of the back story of Leman Russ but without the gibberish in Prospero Burns.

 

Also the story of Russ and the Lion getting into a fight.

[Yogi]

The reason HH is so interesting is because its not majority loyalist perspective (like you know pretty much everything else written). Hell I find it irritating when we have to look from a loyalist within the traitor ranks in what should be a traitor book.

 

All I want is a world eater book from a traitors perspective. The rest can be about Imperial fists spilling milk and hoping in the pain glove for all I care.

 

Although I would like to read about traitors in a loyalist legion, despite having zero evidence of them.

[pueriexdeus]

I just finished book 15 Prospero Burns, having read all the previous 14 I'll have to say #15 is so far the best of them all. I say this because of Dan Abnets story telling ability. Not being a Space Wolf player (I play DA) it was a nice opening up of the SW mentality. I recommend this book to anyone wanting a well written page turner.

 

I hope Dan writes the next DA book in the series.

[pueriexdeus]

The reason HH is so interesting is because its not majority loyalist perspective (like you know pretty much everything else written). Hell I find it irritating when we have to look from a loyalist within the traitor ranks in what should be a traitor book.

 

All I want is a world eater book from a traitors perspective. The rest can be about Imperial fists spilling milk and hoping in the pain glove for all I care.

 

Although I would like to read about traitors in a loyalist legion, despite having zero evidence of them.

You really should read #6 Descent of Angels & #11 Fallen Angels, Sets up and tells the story of the DA split.

[kged]

For any one of these novels to work, and certainly for the series to work, we have to get a glimpse of not just the Fall, but why the Primarchs fell. Some of those stories so far have been excellent, and really do go beyond what I'd rather imagined to be the case (degenerate Fulgrim, fanatic Lorgar, power-mad Magnus etc) to show characters who have their reasons for turning from the Emperor. However execrable I may find those reasons, they are worth telling. They add substance to the fluff, and while the OP has raised a question I have frequently asked myself while reading the HH series, I have found the books usually take me somewhere which illuminates the tragic events. I'm particularly thinking of Magnus in A Thousand Suns, who is very sympathetcially portrayed as one seeking only the best for the Imperium, and frustrated by those who cannot see the value of his methods. I was on the verge of beginning to consider the possibility of perhaps speculating on the slight chance of coming around to his point of view (Emperor absolve me) when the book took a lurch into horror, and it became all too clear that Magnus and his sons had been deceived, leading to the cataclysm of the Throne Room. And I found the telling of Alpharius/Omegon's fall in Legion really very moving - what a dreadful situation for warriors sworn to serve the good of Mankind to find themselves in.

 

It's essential to see things from the protagonists' points of view. The series would just fall apart without these insights. However violently I may oppose their sentiments, we must see that the deluded traitors did at least believe they had just causes to turn from His light. Otherwise, there is no dramatic arc there at all. If Fulgrim is nothing but a sensualist seeking new sensations, then he would be no more than a cypher (no offence, DAs). For him and his fellow traitors to sustain our reading interest they must have tales to tell, motives and passions and loyalties to unscramble.

 

So while I entirely understand the OP's question, having wondered the same thing myself, I would answer "No". Because I have found the books to show us glimpses of the dark and futile paths taken by the traitors, while - in the end - coming back to the absolute necessity of faithful service to the Imperium. Whatever is out there in the empyrean, watching and waiting, however seductive it may initially be, is eternal death to us all. Only the Emperor can save us. And I have no doubt that the series will finally end in that spirit. In the meantime, it's a tribute to some of the authors' talents that the question is even asked; it indicates that they have done their job well.

[Jelle1880]

I for one love some of the books, and how they show the reasoning behind several Legions turning traitor.

 

Especially Thousand Sons showed the misleading of Chaos, as TS thought they were still righteous and didn't notice their mutations, until it was too late.

[Gunslinger87]

For any one of these novels to work, and certainly for the series to work, we have to get a glimpse of not just the Fall, but why the Primarchs fell. Some of those stories so far have been excellent, and really do go beyond what I'd rather imagined to be the case (degenerate Fulgrim, fanatic Lorgar, power-mad Magnus etc) to show characters who have their reasons for turning from the Emperor. However execrable I may find those reasons, they are worth telling. They add substance to the fluff, and while the OP has raised a question I have frequently asked myself while reading the HH series, I have found the books usually take me somewhere which illuminates the tragic events. I'm particularly thinking of Magnus in A Thousand Suns, who is very sympathetcially portrayed as one seeking only the best for the Imperium, and frustrated by those who cannot see the value of his methods. I was on the verge of beginning to consider the possibility of perhaps speculating on the slight chance of coming around to his point of view (Emperor absolve me) when the book took a lurch into horror, and it became all too clear that Magnus and his sons had been deceived, leading to the cataclysm of the Throne Room. And I found the telling of Alpharius/Omegon's fall in Legion really very moving - what a dreadful situation for warriors sworn to serve the good of Mankind to find themselves in.

 

It's essential to see things from the protagonists' points of view. The series would just fall apart without these insights. However violently I may oppose their sentiments, we must see that the deluded traitors did at least believe they had just causes to turn from His light. Otherwise, there is no dramatic arc there at all. If Fulgrim is nothing but a sensualist seeking new sensations, then he would be no more than a cypher (no offence, DAs). For him and his fellow traitors to sustain our reading interest they must have tales to tell, motives and passions and loyalties to unscramble.

 

So while I entirely understand the OP's question, having wondered the same thing myself, I would answer "No". Because I have found the books to show us glimpses of the dark and futile paths taken by the traitors, while - in the end - coming back to the absolute necessity of faithful service to the Imperium. Whatever is out there in the empyrean, watching and waiting, however seductive it may initially be, is eternal death to us all. Only the Emperor can save us. And I have no doubt that the series will finally end in that spirit. In the meantime, it's a tribute to some of the authors' talents that the question is even asked; it indicates that they have done their job well.

 

 

You make some very good points, but I think what this post is trying to look at is something slightly different. i.e. the series has thus far been legitimizing the turning of the traitor legions to chaos. Turning the Black of the traitor legions into more of a gray shade... However, at the same time, it has been doing quite the opposite to the loyalist legions. (i.e. slightly darkening them, or at a very minimum, has definitely criticezed and de-glorified the emperor) shifting everything from a black and white area to a gray-gray area. In being pro-chaos, I understood it that reading the novels has made more ground for why the traitor legions are more tragic heroes rather than "absolute bastards", than shown the positives of the great crusade and the loyalist.

 

It makes complete sense and I've already said that I think that is completely fine. I just hope that when everything is done, it isn't just one big tragedy where nobody is really a "bad guy" (except the chaos gods) and the astartes and primarchs were just puppets :P

 

The fall of Horus, Fulgrim, Magnus, Lorgar, Alpharius/Omegon all of these were fantastically handled and kept different enough to stay appealing and keep us wondering about the others... I just hope we get the likes of DA, GM, A D-B to write a fully loyalist book which shows us the righteousness of Guilliman, Dorn etc.

 

I just have a feeling that rather than that we will see simply another blurring of the lines. i.e. Roboute will be portrayed as not so great, Dorn will have many flaws and perhaps wont be so likeable etc.

 

In THAT I would see it as leaning pro-chaos. Chaos side is being glorified... and besides the loyalists in traitor legions, not much positive is being said about the true loyalists that remained loyal from the start til the end.

 

Loyalists in traitor legions make more interesting stories, yes, but some form of balance will surely come, if only at the very end with the seige of terra trilogy :-D when we finally get to see the way it all comes together ;)

[kged]

However, at the same time, it has been doing quite the opposite to the loyalist legions. (i.e. slightly darkening them, or at a very minimum, has definitely criticezed and de-glorified the emperor)...

Can't dispute this. I'd put it in the context of what I said above about seeing the traitors' perspective, but even so I must agree. But then I speak as one who was genuinely shocked by the scene in - if I recall correctly - Descent of Angels in which the Emperor actually speaks. I'm still a relative noob in the 40kverse, and His Sacred Majesty had until then been a remote, elevated figure who never directly appeared in the fluff which I'd read. To see Him actually depicted on the page, walking and talking amongst His sons and His chosen, provoked a feeling in me that I can only describe in terms of religious outrage - like one whose Old Testament prohibitions of reproducing the image of the Divine has been flouted. Any depiction of Him would have appalled me! But I know that in the end, the HH series need only follow what we already know to be the truth, and The Immortal Emperor will shine through as the champion and saviour of mankind.

[tiberium40k]

I just finished book 15 Prospero Burns, having read all the previous 14 I'll have to say #15 is so far the best of them all. I say this because of Dan Abnets story telling ability. Not being a Space Wolf player (I play DA) it was a nice opening up of the SW mentality. I recommend this book to anyone wanting a well written page turner.

 

How exactly does this tie in to the thread?

 

I hope Dan writes the next DA book in the series.

 

Dan would reject this out of hand, since then he would have to write from a Dark Angels perspective and not from the perspective of some radom character he comes up with.

[Gunslinger87]

I just finished book 15 Prospero Burns, having read all the previous 14 I'll have to say #15 is so far the best of them all. I say this because of Dan Abnets story telling ability. Not being a Space Wolf player (I play DA) it was a nice opening up of the SW mentality. I recommend this book to anyone wanting a well written page turner.

 

How exactly does this tie in to the thread?

 

I hope Dan writes the next DA book in the series.

 

Dan would reject this out of hand, since then he would have to write from a Dark Angels perspective and not from the perspective of some radom character he comes up with.

 

Neither does Abnett-bashing tie in to this thread...

 

PS You're going to have a tough time attacking one of the (if not THE) most well received BL author based on one novel that you didn't like... yet made NYT bestseller list. :devil:

[tiberium40k]

Neither does Abnett-bashing tie in to this thread...

 

OK.

 

PS You're going to have a tough time attacking one of the (if not THE) most well received BL author

 

Mr. Abnett`s ability to write good novels is not in question; I own all six novels of his Inquisitor series and a fair bit of his other 40k works. But that does not make him infallible.

 

based on one novel that you didn't like... yet made NYT bestseller list. :devil:

 

There is a reason why argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument.