Sanguinius as Warmaster

[Billuriye]

All I'm going to add is that fanboi-ism works both ways. And words to the effect of "Chaos wants chaos gets" is merely being a fanboi for the other side.

 

In case you didn't notice, Chaos won the war and the Emperor is dead(kinda). But don't worry i will not argue with you anymore. You destroyed my interest with your slander.

[Sazabi24]

Lot of fanboyism in this thread.

 

Much as you might like to believe it, no matter how much you like somebody, they're no less susceptible to Chaos than anyone else. Except Grey Knights. You know why? Because GW shows us them falling. Only Grey Knights don't.

 

As for Sanguinius, he'd fall in Horus' position. Any Primarch would, the Chaos Gods would just come at it from different angles. Everyone has weaknesses. Anyone who doesn't is a Mary Sue, and those are bad characters. Bloody boring to read about. None of the Primarchs are Mary Sues.

 

... The Emperor is though.

 

*flees*

 

The emperor is more of a secretive douche than a mary sue.

 

Mary Sues are supposed to be able to accomplish anything. The emperor never accomplished any of his greater goals.

[Morollan]

All I'm going to add is that fanboi-ism works both ways. And words to the effect of "Chaos wants chaos gets" is merely being a fanboi for the other side.

 

In case you didn't notice, Chaos won the war and the Emperor is dead(kinda). But don't worry i will not argue with you anymore. You destroyed my interest with your slander.

 

Chaos won? I'm Slandering you? What on earth are you smoking?

[Billuriye]

You called me fanboi. That is slander since i am not one.

Chaos won. Clear cut.

I'm smoking nothing.

[Morollan]

You called me fanboi. That is slander since i am not one.

Chaos won. Clear cut.

I'm smoking nothing.

 

Firstly, slander is verbal. If this was indeed anything of that nature, which it is not, it would in fact be libel, as it's written.

 

Secondly, you're clearly a chaos fanboi, despite your protestations. This is amply demonstrated by your posts in this thread and even within the section I've quoted in which you somewhat bizarrely claim that chaos won and that their victory was clear cut. You must have a strange definition of victory as it seems to include the death of your leader and your retreat from the objective of your campaign.

 

Thirdly, you seem quite happy to post your own views but when anyone posts anything that disagrees with those views you're very quick to pull out the "I don't want to talk to you anymore" card.

[Zynk Kaladin]

Oh man, a lot of "doom and gloom" going on in this thread :)

 

Just because Horus fell doesn't mean Sanguinius would. For all we know, the Angel could surprise us and resist to the will of the dark gods. Considering he has already been tainted with those wings, wouldn't that already put him in a weaker position compared to his brothers? As it stands right now we're guessing off of assumptions and trying to logically deduce the outcome based upon what has already transpired. For all we know, I'm going to guess Sanguinius might have resisted all 4 chaos gods. This assumption is just as valid as its opposite.

 

But how could I possibly think that? Because like the Angel, I'm an optimist. There's always hope for humanity, even in the 41st crap millenia.

 

*shrugs* Not the best argument, or logically sound, but it sure paints some more color on this gloomy thread :P

[The 13th Goat]

Lot of fanboyism in this thread.

Everyone has weaknesses. Anyone who doesn't is a Mary Sue, and those are bad characters. Bloody boring to read about. None of the Primarchs are Mary Sues.

 

... The Emperor is though.

 

*flees*

 

Heresy! Start the Crusade! Purge this thread of all taint!

 

;)

 

 

 

Chaos won. Clear cut.

Yeah, some victory. Legions stuck in internal power struggles, 12 failed attempts at making it further than Cadia (which in galactic terms is like a crusade to the number 10, only to get stuck on 2) and 10'000 years of continued human and xeno existance. You could argue that they never wanted to win, only cause mass mayhem. But if that was the case why gamble on numerous occasions to try and destroy the Imperium? Their as stuffed as the rest of them, hence the preferance of the Grim Dark; eternal stalemate.

 

As for this talk of Sanguinius falling, I believe he would for many of the above reasons. He wasn't perfect, none of them were. The books have all shown that even stalwart Primarch's like Dorn and Guilliman weren't perfect; Dorn arguably felt fear of Kurze, and Guilliman seemed to be up to some Empire building of his own. Sangy could have fallen, if the circumstances were right (or wrong :cry:). The Deamon tried a very direct, Khorne like approach to trying to turn him. If it had been Slaanesh, Tzeetch, Nurgle or a unified front it could have been drastically different.

 

They turned the Emperor's favourite son (Horus), his most devout disciple (Logar), one that knew they were malicious (Magnus) and one that wore his insignia (Fulgrim), all through a variety of methods. Possesion, lying and manipulation could turn even the greatest warlords; to say Sanguinius is not follible in anyway is to say he was perfect, which wasn't the case. None of them were, they were all shades of a greater whole. Whilst Horus did express otherwise, I think it's important to remember that he was only postulating opinion rather than hard evidence.

[Billuriye]

Yeah, some victory. Legions stuck in internal power struggles, 12 failed attempts at making it further than Cadia (which in galactic terms is like a crusade to the number 10, only to get stuck on 2) and 10'000 years of continued human and xeno existance. You could argue that they never wanted to win, only cause mass mayhem. But if that was the case why gamble on numerous occasions to try and destroy the Imperium? Their as stuffed as the rest of them, hence the preferance of the Grim Dark; eternal stalemate.

 

Chaos gods were only concerned with the Emperor since he was the only one who could challenge their rule and the continuous misery and stagnation of mankind. Emperor is dealt with swiftly and mankind is doomed to slow death. They returned to their great game in warp unperturbed. Quite a victory i can say, bordering on curbstomp.

[The 13th Goat]

Chaos gods were only concerned with the Emperor since he was the only one who could challenge their rule and the continuous misery and stagnation of mankind. Emperor is dealt with swiftly and mankind is doomed to slow death. They returned to their great game in warp unperturbed. Quite a victory i can say, bordering on curbstomp.

 

Yeah, what with Necrons and C'Tan raising warp resistant pylons, Tyranids eating everything and organised warp resistant forces killing many deamon princes, plus the continued existance of the last race they tried to munch (Eldar), they really are getting the job done... ;)

[Billuriye]

Yeah, what with Necrons and C'Tan raising warp resistant pylons, Tyranids eating everything and organised warp resistant forces killing many deamon princes, plus the continued existance of the last race they tried to munch (Eldar), they really are getting the job done... ;)

 

What these elements have to do with anything ? I was talking Imperium Chaos struggle. I never claimed that Chaos owns Galaxy. Are we on the same topic ?

Nevermind this has gone way OT.

[MagicMan]

I thought Chaos' victory was a Galaxy locked in eternal war rather than everything besides Chaos being wiped out?

 

 

 

Kind of a cop out ''I still win, so there!'' but yeah. Thats what i thought.

[Nemesor]

Yeah, Chaos vs everyone is like the Joker vs Batman.

 

They don't want to kill everyone else, they just want to fight them. Forever.

 

That's what feeds them.

[Azarias]

The arguments in this thread follow two paths. 1: That, given enough suitable temptation, any one can fall, & 2: Such-and-such Primarch was tempted by Chaos and resisted, ergo incorruptible.

 

I'm of the first path. It's one thing entirely to have something so ostentatiously chaotic to confront you and proffer a devil's deal. It becomes more difficult to resist the slow slide downwards, especially when the incline is so slight as to be almost unnoticeable. Outside the WH40K universe, C. S. Lewis makes this point in the Screwtape Letters, where the he says the preferred manner of damnation the easy downward path, with no stumbling and so forth. It's easier to resist, in Sanguinus' case, the obvious evil and thereby be an obvious hero. It's far more difficult to resist the slow, slight, yet constant pull downwards (see, for example, how regular people might give into addictions - yes, I know it's a poor comparison between the Primarchs and Uncle Buck the alcoholic insurance agent, but the mechanism is still the same), especially if there's (unlike in more mundane situations) a malevolent and nigh-omnipotent set of intellects behind this constant, needling temptation.

 

So, if Sanguinus got the Horus treatment, with a complete exploitation of all his foibles, he probably would have fallen. Instead, he got lucky and got the internet quiz version of the test ("We're out of ideas for this one guy! What do we do?" "Dunno. Throw a Bloodthirster at him. That'll do something").

[Brother Ambroz]

So, if Sanguinus got the Horus treatment, with a complete exploitation of all his foibles, he probably would have fallen. Instead, he got lucky and got the internet quiz version of the test ("We're out of ideas for this one guy! What do we do?" "Dunno. Throw a Bloodthirster at him. That'll do something").

 

 

Hahaha that's awesome and totally true. Seems the Sanguiny fanboys get offended more easily when they hear someone infer their "angel" could possibly if not probably fall to chaos if given the right stew of temptations.

[Morollan]

So, if Sanguinus got the Horus treatment, with a complete exploitation of all his foibles, he probably would have fallen. Instead, he got lucky and got the internet quiz version of the test ("We're out of ideas for this one guy! What do we do?" "Dunno. Throw a Bloodthirster at him. That'll do something").

 

 

Hahaha that's awesome and totally true. Seems the Sanguiny fanboys get offended more easily when they hear someone infer their "angel" could possibly if not probably fall to chaos if given the right stew of temptations.

 

Assuming that's directed at least partially at me, I'm not offended at all. I simply disagree. I also disagree with the summary in the previous post

 

1: That, given enough suitable temptation, any one can fall, & 2: Such-and-such Primarch was tempted by Chaos and resisted, ergo incorruptible.

 

There is a middle path, and it's one that I'm walking whereby you accept that given equal temptation, some individuals will succumb and others will not. Nobody has yet come up with a convincing argument to rid me of that notion.

[Azarias]

1: That, given enough suitable temptation, any one can fall, & 2: Such-and-such Primarch was tempted by Chaos and resisted, ergo incorruptible.

 

There is a middle path, and it's one that I'm walking whereby you accept that given equal temptation, some individuals will succumb and others will not. Nobody has yet come up with a convincing argument to rid me of that notion.

 

And in response, I would say that the temptation given to Sanguinus was hardly up to the standard set by Horus'. To continue my train of belittling metaphors, sending a Bloodthirster is the equivalent of sending a little note with "Do you like Chaos/Want to betray the Emperor?" followed by the two yes/no boxes. Congratulations, Sanguinus passed easy tests. Horus, however, was mired in an almost impossible situation. There's really no comparison.

[Morollan]

1: That, given enough suitable temptation, any one can fall, & 2: Such-and-such Primarch was tempted by Chaos and resisted, ergo incorruptible.

 

There is a middle path, and it's one that I'm walking whereby you accept that given equal temptation, some individuals will succumb and others will not. Nobody has yet come up with a convincing argument to rid me of that notion.

 

And in response, I would say that the temptation given to Sanguinus was hardly up to the standard set by Horus'. To continue my train of belittling metaphors, sending a Bloodthirster is the equivalent of sending a little note with "Do you like Chaos/Want to betray the Emperor?" followed by the two yes/no boxes. Congratulations, Sanguinus passed easy tests. Horus, however, was mired in an almost impossible situation. There's really no comparison.

 

Nice oversimplification there. What exactly was it that Horus went through that was so different and difficult? Seems to me he fell pretty easily.

[MagicMan]

I kinda see Chaos as being similar to the Ring in Lotr (Omg nerd), if someone told you what it was and handed it to you and asked you to put it on and be cool with Sauron you'd tell them to stuff it.

 

 

If you'd had it in your possession for a long time as it slowly poisoned your mind, you'd put it on and try to show all your friends your fancy new ring while flailing around in a ghostworld with Sauron screaming death and doom in your ear.

[Dark Apostle Thirst]

1: That, given enough suitable temptation, any one can fall, & 2: Such-and-such Primarch was tempted by Chaos and resisted, ergo incorruptible.

 

There is a middle path, and it's one that I'm walking whereby you accept that given equal temptation, some individuals will succumb and others will not. Nobody has yet come up with a convincing argument to rid me of that notion.

Well, duh. What would corrupt one Word Bearer wouldn't corrupt another. What would corrupt that Word Bearer wouldn't corrupt an Ultramarine. That's common sense; there is a reason no-one has disputed that.

 

Sanguinus would fall, if he were the Warmaster. So would any of the primarchs. So would anybody, save for the Emperor himself.

 

It's really not that terrible to be considered corruptible, that just means you're like almost everyone else in the galaxy. Even the Eldar fell.

[Brother Ambroz]

Nice oversimplification there. What exactly was it that Horus went through that was so different and difficult? Seems to me he fell pretty easily.

 

Hypocritical much? Horus was essentially killed and revived using chaos magic. You really really don't like chaos don't you?

What you're saying is Sanguinus is essentially incorruptable. The position of warmaster itself wasn't meant for anyone but the emperor that's why anyone but the emperor would be corrupted.

[Beef]

Sang was incorruptable, as for his curse it was not a flaw, it was his psycik (sp) pain that his children felt overwelming them. horus had a chink in his emotional/mental armour that erebas exploited, Sang did not.

 

Just like Russ he was incorruptable. People mention the Sw turning currupt and its only possible if they have malfunctioning genesede. Usually the wulfen gene manifests itself as a defence mechanism against chaos. But GW decided that they would ignore that fact and show a whole section of Sw turning on their own brothers and joining up with Huron? Thats just poor writing. Surely russ would have been a better canditate or catch than mortarian or pertubro or Fulgrim. So why did the chaos gods not get their grubby paws on Russ or Sang? simple. they could not corrucpt certain Primarchs. some had flaws they overcame whilst some were incapable of overcoming their flaws. Horus was pathetic, listening to Ereabus over his own sons.

 

Would Russ do something similar? I really doubt it.

[chaplain belisarius]

in my opinion Sanguinius would never fall to chaos-never. Its the biggest part of his fluff that he is pure and noble.

 

I also doubt that dorn, russ and guilliman would be unlikely to fall to chaos.

 

Back on topic-horus was the best of all the primarchs, horus was the only choice for warmaster-thats the tragedy of it, the best of the emperors sons being corrupted.

 

just my 2 cents...

[Azarias]

Nice oversimplification there. What exactly was it that Horus went through that was so different and difficult? Seems to me he fell pretty easily.

 

Thanks. Not one of my finer ones though.

 

In addition to the mentionings above, he went through a series of events that shook his confidence in his own abilities, augmented as they were, and in his ability to meet the incredible demands placed upon him. The superhuman equivalent of a nervous breakdown, if you will. Add to that a near-death experience, along with a series of visions that serve to entirely undo the trust you have in the emperor (your father, role-model, friend, ideal image of humanity, etc...), and the necessary stress-fractures something like that causes, and you have a fairly good recipe for a fall. He dealt with everything that Sanguinus had to (ie. death of comrades, incredible physical trauma) and more. Once again, there's no comparison.

[Candleshoes]

Sanguinius. It should have been him. He has the vision and strength to carry us to victory, and the wisdom to rule once victory is won. For all his aloof coolness, he alone has the Emperor's soul in his blood. Each of us carries part of our father within us, whether it is his hunger for battle, his psychic talent or his determination to succeed. Sanguinius holds it all. It should have been his...

 

 

We know all the Primarchs carry deep flaws that are capable of consuming them. The above quote is given in the context that Sanguinius would have been a better choice if the Imperium of Man never came into a consuming conflict with chaos. Sanguinius was the better choice for what the Imperium was becoming, he was the one who could both conquer AND rule. He was a better choice in that context.

 

However, chaos ever present, would enevitabley have ensured that a peaceful Imperium would never come to pass, no matter who was Warmaster.

 

Sanguinius would have fallen just as hard as Horus, if not harder if placed in a specific set of circumstances designed by Gods to play to his greatest fears, desires, shortcomings, dreams, hopes, primal angers, and gene-bred psyche. It is very difficult to judge that he would have had the strength to not fall as Horus did and took the initiative. For all we know, and an educated guess, if a non-warmaster Horus saw the Heresy begin around him the way Sanguinius did, it is very likely he would have stayed loyal to the Emperor. Context and Circumstance mean everything in this case, but there has been nothing written by GW creators to point that Sanguinius was perfect and uncorruptable in all aspects, and because of those flaws, as small as they may be, he would fall when pushed over the edge. Not even the Emperor was immune to this, and the WH40K universe is littered with his choices and the suffering they brought on the very people he tried to hold high.

[Brother Ambroz]

Sang was incorruptable, as for his curse it was not a flaw, it was his psycik (sp) pain that his children felt overwelming them. horus had a chink in his emotional/mental armour that erebas exploited, Sang did not.

 

Just like Russ he was incorruptable. People mention the Sw turning currupt and its only possible if they have malfunctioning genesede. Usually the wulfen gene manifests itself as a defence mechanism against chaos. But GW decided that they would ignore that fact and show a whole section of Sw turning on their own brothers and joining up with Huron? Thats just poor writing. Surely russ would have been a better canditate or catch than mortarian or pertubro or Fulgrim. So why did the chaos gods not get their grubby paws on Russ or Sang? simple. they could not corrucpt certain Primarchs. some had flaws they overcame whilst some were incapable of overcoming their flaws. Horus was pathetic, listening to Ereabus over his own sons.

 

Would Russ do something similar? I really doubt it.

 

Pathetic? Horus was the greatest warrior after the Emperor and possibly Sanguinus. Hardly pathetic. Your fanboism is too much for me.