Have the 30k stories ruined the 40k stories?

[Valkyrion]

Now that the HH series is in full swing I've found that I actually don't like any of the books I thought I did.

No other space marine books are as good as anything the HH has produced.

 

The best Black Library non HH books are the Eisenhorn and Ravener books, with a good shout out to Angels of Darkness and Soul Hunter.

The Ultramarines, Space Wolves, Soul Drinkers, Salamanders, Word Bearers, Blood Angels and Battles books are all varying degress of average and they don't seem as well written.

 

I'm not one for classically written perfect styles, but I haven't found any book to be a page turner that I can't put down outside of the HH series.

I didn't realise that I thought this until I was looking at my book case having put Mechanicum away for the 12th time and picking up Fulgrim for the 10th time that I have no desire to reread any non HH book.

 

That isn't to say I haven't enjoyed them, I have. It's like quite liking Megadeth until you hear some Metallica. Megadeth will never get the same air time again.

 

Anyone else feel like this? That only the HH series is worth reading?

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

Not really, though I consider the HH series to be the cream of BL's crop. I think if anything, they've amplified the 40K stories in displaying just how far things slipped in the intervening 10,000 years in some ways, or never changed at all in others, and all of it detrimental. The emphasis on the stagnation is much more potent now than it was prior to the publications of the HH books. I'm having no issues re-reading the 40K-era novels in comparison.

[Frater Uriah]

I'm not about to say that the HH books have ruined the regular 40K books. Look at it in terms of volume of production: they are only going to produce so many HH books, whereas the sky is the limit for the 40K setting. It is about an event that took place 10,000 years ago and is over. It only deals peripherally with Orks, Eldar, and other forms of Xenos, and focuses predominantly upon the Astartes, so it really only has so many novel-length stories to tell. People have postulated at between 22-42 in this forum, and I think, if it actually makes it to 42, the series could potentially run the danger of jumping the shark in the mid-30s.

 

The stories in the HH books are, in general, good (some in the range of very good to excellent), and distilled down to the essence of the Astartes (and some Assassins against Astartes, and a couple of soldiers who worked with the Alpha Legion, which consists of Astartes, for example), so when you read one of the books, you are really getting your dose of Space Marines. But they are Astartes-focused, and I do not think that one can safely say that the books in the 40K setting have been ruined by them. There are a lot of excellent books set in the 40K time period, some not-so-good ones, and some that I have to admit that I just couldn't make it through. They deal with Astartes, and Traitors, and soldiers, and Eldar and Orks and all sorts of other stuff in-between, so there is quite a large base of material to choose from, each to one's own liking.

 

One of the greatest, most appealing things about the Horus Heresy books is that a long-time 40K buff like me can sit down and read the book and think, "Ah, so that's how that happened!" There's something fascinating about a universe that has a history so detailed, its seminal events at its founding so epic, that it can launch a grand series of books that can detail it and satisfy its readership's need for a good story at the same time. Does this make the HH series better than the 40K setting? Certainly not. HH approaches things from a certain point of view at a certain angle: if you like how things look through that parallax of Imperial history, then you will in general love the set up and execution of the Horus Heresy series. Or, you can pick up any 40K novel, read it and enjoy it (or not, as is your preference) and think of the great ideas and backstory it can give your next tabletop mission.

[Simonius]

I certainly feel that with the HH novels BL authors have "raised the bar" in the standard of writing on show. Actually probably helped that they're allowed to write slightly longer stories than the usual 100k word limit we see in our 40k fare.

 

What we see is really the HH novels breaking into the realms of mainstream science fiction writing for a more discerning (mature?) reader than the 40k setting, which is more pulp sci-fi, straight up action adventure stuff.

 

Does this ruin the 40k books?

 

Nah, not really, you just have to be in a different mood to read them.

 

Just my opinion anyway.

[Simonius]

triple post - b****y computer!

[Brother Captain Gladius]

As someone who only got into Warhammer through HH, i can confirm that from what I have read (a lot) the HH books are good enough on the whole to be a genuine mainstream sci-fi series. 40K stories are good fun as fluff to the actual game, but at times are poor. I think HH benefits from having a stricter framework to work to.

[Valkyrion]

Maybe 'ruin' is the wrong word.

 

I've trying to think of a comparison to better illustrate my point...I think maybe the Horus Heresy series is Star Wars - the definitive 40k sci fi, whilst the other space marine books are Starship Troopers - pointless fun.

 

I don't dislike any books really except Rynn's World, but my point was that I liked all the books more before I became engrossed in the HH series.

 

I only mean the space marine books, incidently. I haven't read the gaunts series, and I think the Eisenhorn trilogy is up there with the best books I've ever read in any genre. The first three HH books especially trump any other space marine book.

[Clewz]

I'm in the same camp as that they've raised the bar. Think there was a point that BL were aiming the stuff at a younger audience but I think with starting to get on best seller lists has been a bit of a wake up call. I think with the introduction of talented new authors such as ADB and Nick Kyme is helping matters greatly

[Captain Idaho]

I believe BL definitely need some need blood with enthusiasm and skill to bring 40K novels into a main stream instead of the literary equivilent of soft porn.

 

Of course there are already some great new authors out there and the older authors aren't too shabby either, but times move on and things get old and out of date.

 

I would have to be honest though and confess that a number of novels released (without singling anyone out in particular) seem to be rushed for a quick buck from authors. Sometimes the books seem to be written for a younger target audience, not because of the themes but because of the short sentence structure and obvious plot lines etc.

 

I think the HH series are written for a slightly more mature audience, or at least have included them in their target. Which is why when compared to the novels that aren't a little, how shall we say less substantial, they really stand out.

[Valkyrion]

The battles series in particular is very sci-fi by numbers.

 

The Crimson Fists are my favourite chapter, but I like to pretend Rynn's World never existed.

I have no real love for the Black Templars (or Orks), but Helsreach is the best of that particular series, but ADB is responsible for Soul Hunter, which is practically a HH book, and First Heretic so it was always going to be at worst well written and entertaining, even if the subject matter wasn't to my taste.

 

The Iron Warrior book is pretty good as is Daemon World, but it's the series of books where they seem to fall down - Blood Angels and Soul Drinkers in particular, and it's odd because Swallow wrote Flight which is one of the best HH books and Counter did Galaxy in Flames, so it is seems to be a brief the authors are given - write it as though it was a cartoon.

[Crimson Fisting]

I love 40K. Love it. Have loved it for 18 years. It's my favorite fictional world/ universe. Let's be realistic, Black Library novels, including the Heresy series, are all sub par when compared to 'mainstream' novels. As an avid reader I find that I really have to force myself through 99% of BL's titles. There are a few exceptions: Eisenhorn is good. Good, not great. The only HH books I found to be 'page-turners' were Flight of the Eisenstein, Fulgrim and Battle for the Abyss. Most BL books are on level with horribly written fan fiction. I especially found Rynn's World to be vomit inducing, and the way they produce the Space Marine Battles series with HUGE font in order to make them larger and charge $11.99 for them is f***ing ridiculous. Just being a realist, if you really want to bone up on 40K lore, just stick to codices, rulebooks and wikis, and spend your time reading novels that are worthy of production.

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

I love 40K. Love it. Have loved it for 18 years. It's my favorite fictional world/ universe. Let's be realistic, Black Library novels, including the Heresy series, are all sub par when compared to 'mainstream' novels. As an avid reader I find that I really have to force myself through 99% of BL's titles. There are a few exceptions: Eisenhorn is good. Good, not great. The only HH books I found to be 'page-turners' were Flight of the Eisenstein, Fulgrim and Battle for the Abyss. Most BL books are on level with horribly written fan fiction. I especially found Rynn's World to be vomit inducing, and the way they produce the Space Marine Battles series with HUGE font in order to make them larger and charge $11.99 for them is f***ing ridiculous. Just being a realist, if you really want to bone up on 40K lore, just stick to codices, rulebooks and wikis, and spend your time reading novels that are worthy of production.

 

Almost agree, but I'd happily put Helsreach up against anything David Weber or John Ringo publishes and consider them to be kiddie literature, and this is coming from a guy whose favorite Tolkien book is The Silmarillion. It doesn't happen as often as it should, but the BL is capable of producing quality SF. :)

[dustermaker]

The HH novels are a great read, and are some of the best marine books I have ever read. That said, Lord of the Night is still my favorite book out of all of them. Then new Salamander book is pretty good and a lot of the chaos books are great reads. They give a different point of view on the Imperium.

[A D-B]

As someone who only got into Warhammer through HH, i can confirm that from what I have read (a lot) the HH books are good enough on the whole to be a genuine mainstream sci-fi series. 40K stories are good fun as fluff to the actual game, but at times are poor. I think HH benefits from having a stricter framework to work to.

 

I think the problem here is a comparative one, though.

 

When someone says "Most of the HH novels are great", they're comparing less than 10 authors, and only 4-5 guys on the finalised/permanent/current/whatever team, who were specifically invited to write for the series by editorial choice.

 

When someone says "Most of the 40K novels are awful", they're comparing about 50 or 60 authors, and are usually applying a blanket statement to a lot of writers they've never even read.

 

The framework on HH is no stricter, really. This is a topic that's basically marred by a lot of prejudice and outdated bias, coupled with some genuine concern. For example, yes, I'd say that in the past, more of BL's authors were aiming at a different, younger audience. I'd also say that there's an argument that BL publishes lots of mediocre stuff, because every publisher, every movie production company, every theater, does that.

 

However, a blanket statement like "all 40K novels are poorly written" is one of those holdovers from a long time ago, when tie-in fiction was a swear word, and something "real writers" sneered at. It's a bias that's evaporating in the industry, but in fandom, it's taking much longer to go, because of the way fandom works. For fans, "good enough" is often, well, good enough. You have people raving about every (for example) novel about Chapter X as being amazing, just because it's an okay book about a subject they love. And it goes the other way, too - in a subjective, loose license like 40K, where boltguns really can canonically work in 700 different ways and the IP overlords like it that way - you have people decrying quite well-written novels as terrible, purely because it didn't match their view of canon, or a previous canon source they liked.

 

Ultimately, saying "All 40K novels are worse than mainstream novels" is silly, and fictitious. But it has its roots in a time when that was arguably true, and is a trope of fandom that clings long after the publishing industry (and writers themselves) have shaken it off. Most authors who write tie-in fiction also write their own original works, and many famous authors (Neil Gaiman? Michael Moorcock?) have done tie-in stuff, because they loved a license.

 

I apply Sturgeon's Law to pretty much everything, whether it's what I read, play or watch. "90% of everything is crud."

[Pavement Artist]

I also think that the bulk of Black Library novels are aimed at a different market than the Horus Heresy books. Yes they're all for fans of the license but look at the majority of customers in a GW store; the Median age would be around 14 (if we're talking a general weekend day lets say). That was the age that i started playing the hobby and also the same age at which i picked up Space Wolf which was my first foray into GW publishing. I loved that book and still find myself reading it generally once a year and enjoy all the warm familarity that comes with a good book and old slippers. Age and other reading pursuits have started to show some of the cracks in the story but nevertheless it remains a fond read.

 

Books like Space Wolf can't really be judged in comparison to lets say, Horus Rising because they were books written years apart with a fundamentally different tone and the influences of a shift in editorial attitudes. The Horus Heresy novels from my stand point have always been a sort of "Prestige" series, something for the older gamer to enjoy more than say the blood angels series. This isn't to say that younger gamers can't enjoy Horus Heresy novels, or older hobbyists cant enjoy the general BL fare, more that when you take into account the depth and complexity of Horus Rising in comparison with Space wolf you can see that one is quite a dense, mature story whereas one seems a lot more action driven and whimsical.

 

It's not to say that one style is better than the other, merely that the BL is offering products that appeal to the wide age demographic that comes with the hobby. If you're a 13 year old, doe eyed new gamer, clutching at their newly brought tactical squad, then Space wolf is going to fire your imagination. It's a very good, accessible and exciting story that isn't too mired in the continuity of the universe. Hand the same gamer Horus Rising out of the bat and they're going to find it largely impenetrable. Not to decry the reading abilities of 13 year olds, just making the point that the Horus Heresy books carry the weight of history of 40k on their shoulders and can only really be enjoyed fully with a fairly good understanding of the Background.

 

I disagree that the heresy novels have had a detrimental effect on other Black Library titles. They're fantastically written books for the most part and are intentionally more complex than most licensed fiction, it's only natural that you're going to go back to your copy of Deus Sanguinius and go "Well that seems a bit crap now". It's because you've grown as a person and a reader, you're not the newbie thats as fired up by bolters banging and all that lark. You demand more than swashbuckling in space, we're all asking for craziness like depth and character development!

 

And you know what? You're getting it. The Horus Heresy books have if anything, proved that licensed fiction can be legitimately great books. Several of the novels have made it to the Times bestseller list, that doesn't happen all too often. Remember when Lord of the Rings won oscars? That was a bit of an anomaly, fantasy isnt generally well received in the mainstream. If GW see their books performing that well on a commercial level, it's going to tell them that they can take more risks with the books that they put out, that they dont have to just be fan servicing. Compare the novels we have coming out now: Space marine battles is another attempt at a prestige sort of series that, admittedly whilst being hit and miss so far has shown that space marine novels can be more complex than 8 foot dudes blowing tanks up all day erryday.

 

Look at Soul Hunter for God's sake-Tell me that doesnt eclipse most non Heresy releases since Black library started.

[Valkyrion]

I haven't been a newbie for almost 20 years, and I've acknowledged how good Soul Hunter is.

 

The space marines battle series has, by and large, reinforced the point that the HH series is having a detrimental effect on the BL books. The books are completely and totally different in every single way to any HH book.

The Blood Angels books and Flight and Nemesis are written by the same author and there is a massive difference between the quality of the writing, same with Galaxy in Flames and the Soul Drinkers.

 

It's not a case of 'growing up', its a case of the Black Library putting out very sci fi by numbers material for years until they actually release proper novels and the proper novels comfortably outshining the rest, as evidenced by the Best Sellers entries. In the wake the of HH series of books the standard of writing has dropped in the latest non HH books, with one or two exceptions.

[Pavement Artist]

The Blood angels series is judged most harshly on the first two books, which i admit i didn't enjoy too much. Flight of the Eisenstein came out a fair while after those novels though, i think it's more a case of James Swallow being much more confident and comfortable writing in the 40k setting.

 

Of course the Heresy books make standard Black library fare look a little lacklustre but you're judging them against works that were brought out when BL was largely just servicing fans with quick, accessible stories. They can't be accused of being any more by numbers than any other licensed fiction publisher. (Just look at the amount of dreck that comes out under the Star Wars and Star Trek banners). The problem if anything, is that the Heresy series actually went out there and proved licensed stories can be truly great books in their own right.

 

Like i said before, it doesn't necessarily mean that all Black Library fare should automatically be as complex and maturely written as the Heresy novels because they are aimed at an older hobbyist. These more simplistic stories still have a place in stores as a way to introduce younger gamers into the setting.

[Roesor]

I would agree 'for the more mature audience' thing, I mean look at Fulgrim, some of the stuff in that...well...it wasn't exactly PG was it O.o Whereas everyone could enjoy say Helsreach, or Brothers of the Snake.

[A D-B]

I haven't been a newbie for almost 20 years, and I've acknowledged how good Soul Hunter is.

 

The space marines battle series has, by and large, reinforced the point that the HH series is having a detrimental effect on the BL books. The books are completely and totally different in every single way to any HH book.

The Blood Angels books and Flight and Nemesis are written by the same author and there is a massive difference between the quality of the writing, same with Galaxy in Flames and the Soul Drinkers.

 

It's not a case of 'growing up', its a case of the Black Library putting out very sci fi by numbers material for years until they actually release proper novels and the proper novels comfortably outshining the rest, as evidenced by the Best Sellers entries.

 

I'm not sure I really believe that, myself. None of us are bringing our A games to the Horus Heresy, and then letting the rest of our 40K novels just get by with the B team. It's easy to attribute the differences to whatever works in order to prove a point, though. F'rex: it could be argued that the difference in Nemesis and the Blood Angels novels isn't anything to do with the Heresy series, and if there is a difference, it's purely down to Jim Swallow's writing style evolving/changing/whatever after 5+ years. It could be said that Galaxy in Flames and Soul Drinkers actually aren't much different in terms of writing quality (prose, characterisation, etc.), but because Galaxy in Flames is about such a grand and incredible event, the writing quality is overlooked. I could go on and cast more examples, but all of these opinions are subjective, meaning they can be adapted to whatever point is being made.

 

So it's a tricky slope, this one. I think the difference in recent BL quality at the so-called "top tier" is down to the following:

 

1. Veteran writers getting even better.

2. New, (subjectively better) writers than in the past.

3. The fact it's the Horus Heresy, which has the advantages of anticipation, fandom love, and easily accepted as canon.

[A D-B]

Like i said before, it doesn't necessarily mean that all Black Library fare should automatically be as complex and maturely written as the Heresy novels because they are aimed at an older hobbyist. These more simplistic stories still have a place in stores as a way to introduce younger gamers into the setting.

 

This is where I start to get confused, though. I'm not certain any of the HH team write their 30K and 40K any differently, from the perspectives that are being mentioned in this thread. I know for a fact that I - and I'm betting Dan, from all our talks - don't write an HH and non-HH novel any differently in terms of subject matter and maturity. Sure, the themes of the eras are totally different, but that's a narrative thing.

 

So I'm sort of confused why this is starting to stick as an opinion. We're not writing them, or being edited, any differently. The difference is that you're comparing 4-5 writers with 50-60, and it's a flawed comparison. Soul Hunter, a 40K novel, is no more or less mature than Fulgrim, The First Heretic, or Prospero Burns, and was written no differently to The First Heretic.

 

It's all authorial choice. Every writer sees the setting in a different way. Some clearly prefer the cake of bombastic heroism, others like the cookie of raucous humour up to 11, and others prefer a deeper slice of grimdark pie. The balances always shift, and if the Heresy series is different, I'm not convinced it's for the reasons being assumed in this thread.

 

This is dead fascinating, though.

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

So I'm sort of confused why this is starting to stick as an opinion. We're not writing them, or being edited, any differently. The difference is that you're comparing 4-5 writers with 50-60, and it's a flawed comparison. Soul Hunter, a 40K novel, is no more or less mature than Fulgrim, The First Heretic, or Prospero Burns, and was written no differently to The First Heretic.

 

I think most of this perception is stemming from the concept that all the 40K-era novels are stories, whereas the HH series novels are information. I've been musing on this ever since your blog about how irate some people get about the limited edition runs, and it dawned on me that their ire about them didn't materialize until the prospect of there being limited-edition Heresy-era ones. In that respect, it's not that folks are irked that it's going to be 1000 copies, it's that only 1000 people are going to be allowed access to the information. 40K-era novels have the wealth of fluff in the game and the "realtime" aspect going for them: you can afford to miss a 40K novel and your information database isn't going to dramatically suffer from a blind spot that isn't readily correctible or deduced through intuition. 30K-era novels are the Real Deal, and as such have become SERIOUS BUSINESS. ;)

[Marshal Rohr]

Helsreach has been the only SM Battle novels that wasn't just an extension of a story in the Codex. And it was the only one I have been able to say is worth reading.

[Lexington]

Honestly, I've not thought any of the Heresy novels to be their authors' best 40K works. I've managed to toss Horus Rising aside out of pure boredom at least five times by now, and only got through Legion out of sheer determination, but adore Double Eagle and the Eisenhorn trilogy. Similarly, though I liked The First Heretic quite a bit, I didn't find it as interesting or affecting as Helsreach. Really, I'm always wondering what it is that people are seeing in this series that I'm not.

 

I think most of this perception is stemming from the concept that all the 40K-era novels are stories, whereas the HH series novels are information.

I'd say that if the Heresy series is ruining the "current" 40K era in any way, it's this. It explains away the setting's foundational mysteries left and right, and seems to be determined to make the location and momentum of every atom in the 41st Millenium the direct result of some Heresy-era power play. For me, anyway, this makes the modern setting feel like an after-thought to the events in the Heresy novels, and robs it of a lot of power.

[Pavement Artist]

Like i said before, it doesn't necessarily mean that all Black Library fare should automatically be as complex and maturely written as the Heresy novels because they are aimed at an older hobbyist. These more simplistic stories still have a place in stores as a way to introduce younger gamers into the setting.

 

This is where I start to get confused, though. I'm not certain any of the HH team write their 30K and 40K any differently, from the perspectives that are being mentioned in this thread.

 

You know that was one of those things where as soon as i hit "Post" i was like "Well you got that arse about face". Not entirely sure why i said "written"

 

From my point of view, Horus Rising just grabbed me straight away as a much darker and complex story. Maybe it was me just putting my own little fantastical notion of prestige on the series, i was just bowled over how fantastically different it was to anything else id previously read from the Black Library. In the years since the series started, it seems that as a publisher, BL seem to be encouraging a wider range of stories rather than just "IMPERIUM IMPERIUM IMPERIUM" like it was even a few years ago. It's even had a knock on effect with the fantasy stories and their "Time of Legends" series.

 

It's a fantastic thing. My point (and what a lovely roundabout point it was) was that the Heresy series is far from detrimental to Black Library stories. If anything, it's been a showcase for some of the most talented writers BL have and the stories do set the bar high but it doesn't mean they're immediately nuking all non 30k fiction.

 

A-D-B: Sorry about that. See with your novels i've picked them all up sequentially which is a first for a BL writer and so i can see the little quirks that come with your writing style in each book and it's perhaps more apparent to me than before that it's just your style and there's no conscious effort to step up or step down purposefully for any particular story . I doubt that anybody phones it in when they're writing a 40k novel, it'd seem a bit detrimental to the working process trying to be deliberately average.

After starting the heresy series i went back through the Abnett back catalogue and read Eisenhorn and the like and i think that my relative newbie status to BL fiction meant i was confusing Horus Rising being "adult" and "complex" with Dan just being a great writer.

 

Personally, i Blame the Horus Heresy book covers. They just look a lot more....Bespoke. I feel like they should come with a velvet smoking jacket and a decanter of Brandy.

[Brother Captain Gladius]

ADB thanks for the comments, I find it really interesting to hear from an auther, it gives a whole new perspective to the discussion, something you rarely get with any other science fiction. I think my original comment may have been misunderstood (prob because i didnt write it how i meant it) I think its more to do with enjoyment. I have enjoyed the HH novels more than I have the 40k novels. The 40k universe is so vast and open, therefore writers can write what they want within certain guidelines, this occasionaly leads to the stories getting lost somehow. Take esienhorn and say the grey knights trilogy. I doubt an independant reader (not aquainted with warhammer) would realse that they are set at a similar time, or in the same universe.

 

The HH novels are about a set story with clearly defined parameters. Plus the events of the HH timeframe are quite well known, so its more of a thrill to see them written about. I just feel that they flow into each other more, and the whole series has a kinda cohesive element to it. 40K doesnt have that. Dont get me wrong, some of the 40k novels I love, eisenhorn, ravenor, grey knights trilogy and helsreach are amazing, but they are very much independant stories, designed to be read as such, HH is designed to be read as a 20-30 novel series.

 

If you can pick some sense out of that, then you are a better man than I.