Ubermensch Commander Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 @Jarredm Yeah I have seen those quotes by ADB and they are excellent. Yet I have a few problems with them: 1) Other Legions already took part in the One/Two times Legions had to execute Legions and most importantly 2) Those quotes were never in the book. Rather like First Heretic, we are given a look into a Legion's mentality in Prospero Burns and it failed to suspend my disbelief that a Legion (other than say Word Bearers) could be so blinkered as to say "Hahaha we are the most ferocious and the executioners of the Emperor!" Soooo....howsabout those other Legions that joined in when the missing Legions were dealt with ? (as hinted in The First Heretic) Didn't count? They threw some grenades outside the lines and thus were called foul? Also, in an interview about his book(little youtube snippet on the BlackLibarary website some time back), Abnett answered a question that did not need to be asked or had already been answered "Why would the Emperor allow so feral a Legion to exist?" Well, Abnett figured it must be to have a pit bull on a leash. Maybe, but I would disagree. They were allowed to exist because each of the Legions had large autonomy in their appearance, traits, rituals, and character. Night Lords, World Eaters-Two notable savage and monstrous Legions also allowed to continue. White Scars-Also feral and tribal in nature. There simply was no need, IMO, build the book around "answering" such a question. As for the Daemon thing, I suppose changing it to be "mwahahaha! cuning plan!" whether AL or Chaos Deamons where there was none before irks me. Rather than playing the well established note that Russ's rampant hatred for Magnus and sorcery spurred him to sack Prospero, under Horus suggestion to alter "bring back in chains" to "burn it all" I will stop here as folks enjoyed it, great for them, but there are a great many things about that book that bothered the hell out of me. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2850963 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributis Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 But the Night Lords and World Eaters both got severely slapped wrists for acting like the monsters they were. The wolves were distrusted by the Imperial Army etc but they never brought direct criticism upon themselves. And You really feel the need to ask why the wolves might say "YES! WE ARE THE BEST! WE ARE THE EMPERORS CHOSEN!"? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2851184 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Apostle Thirst Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 Battle for the AByss, IMO, was not that bad.Each of the marines represented the idea of their Legions. No twists, the Space Wolves barked, the T-Son muttered magic junk, the World Eaters snarled, and the Ultramarines mediated. Works for me in a book that does not focus on one Legion at a time. I'm sorry, but that's an incredibly one-dimensional view of the Legion's characters. Mind you, I didn't like not because of "not enough Primarch" but rather Abnett's "The savagery is all an act...bark bark arrooo animal tendencies." It jarred. HARD. Plus, Russ "offering his brother surrender" by yelling into "that guys" face, the inconsistency in Daemon power, no one noticing said Daemon, How are Space Wolves even able to consider themselves the Big E's executioners with the Night Lords and World Eaters around and lots of Legions helped take out the missing ones (The First Heretic touches on this), Russ/Magnus rivalry and hate being downplayed in favor of "Nyahah! A Chaos Daemon did!", etc etc. In essence, at its core, I just did not like how it messed with the fluff and I could not suspend my disbelief nor enjoy the characters presented. Not trying to derail or diminish other peoples enjoyment of the book, just stating it was not because of "not enough Primarchs or explosions." And yet I completely agree with this Biggest problem with Battle for the Abyss is that it didn't have characters it had plot devices. If the characters in that book were any more one dimensional they would run the risk of collapsing into a black hole. Keeping with general legion traits is one thing but Brynngar was a caricature as was Mhotep and Zadkiel should've been named Snidely Whiplash with all of his moustache twirling. The overall plot was bland and highly predictable which to me is the worst thing a piece of entertainment can be, it wasn't that it was bad (because bad stories can have their own amusement) it was so middling that if I didn't have to spend several hours on a plane every week I never would've made it through. I'm somebody who actually really liked the first Dark Angels book and I frankly couldn't care less about Primarchs and explosions I like characters and this book failed to deliver even one actual character that was more than a personality type/plot device with a name tag. Exactly. A story is not made interesting by the events, but by the characters. The events are merely there to show just how interesting a character can be, and Battle for the Abyss failed to do that, save for the Thousand Sons Librarian - his character leapt forward developmentally when he showed the Ultramarine his vision. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2851415 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparhawk Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 I would also like to add that they didn't spend enough time with the most potentially interesting character, The Furious Abyss. I realize that this isn't a Space Opera but it is possible to turn a ship into a character rather than merely a set piece. I think they managed to do this relatively well with the Eisenstein and I've seen it done very well in non-BL sci-fi novels as well. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2851439 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Apostle Thirst Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 I would also like to add that they didn't spend enough time with the most potentially interesting character, The Furious Abyss. I realize that this isn't a Space Opera but it is possible to turn a ship into a character rather than merely a set piece. I think they managed to do this relatively well with the Eisenstein and I've seen it done very well in non-BL sci-fi novels as well. What with the Machine Spirit and all, yes, I agree. While the Soul Drinkers series wasn't the best, it did provide a decent example of how a machine spirit might be viewed and characterised. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2851451 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavement Artist Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 So I enjoyed it will enough myself. Best of the series. No. Worst? Nope, I give Prospero Burns or Legion that one, though I know some will disagree. Did you just say Legion was the worst HH novel. With a straight face? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2852146 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Father Ferrum Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 So I enjoyed it will enough myself. Best of the series. No. Worst? Nope, I give Prospero Burns or Legion that one, though I know some will disagree. Did you just say Legion was the worst HH novel. With a straight face? He did. He let me know why in PMs, and there are some well-reasoned arguments in there. I don't agree with them, but its hard to fault him for the logic of his opinion. I'll forward the message to you. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2852525 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artein Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 He dares to bring some well-reasoned arguments to the discussion?! Shame on him! Shame! But honestly, I can see why people might dislike Legion, Battle for the Abyss, Descent of Angels, Prospero Burns and any other novels out there. None was perfect. I like all of them. :lol: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2852643 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aegnor Posted August 21, 2011 Share Posted August 21, 2011 I'm in the Battle of Abyss read a bit like one dimensional fanfic camp. "Hail laddie, I'm Brynnor the Space Wolf Lord from the alcoholic and somehow slightly Scottish Space Wolf chapter" Brynnor the Space Wolf snarled. "Would you like some Space Wolf mead, because we like alcohol?". Etc etc. Didn't think Skraal was that interesting a character either - thought the Thousand Son was, and maybe that's just cos the archetype of the loyalist TSon was fresh to me at that stage. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2853020 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Sanguine Posted August 21, 2011 Share Posted August 21, 2011 Man this was a truly boring read. Another thing happening in Ben Counter's universe. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2853215 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ubermensch Commander Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 So I enjoyed it will enough myself. Best of the series. No. Worst? Nope, I give Prospero Burns or Legion that one, though I know some will disagree. Did you just say Legion was the worst HH novel. With a straight face? He did. He let me know why in PMs, and there are some well-reasoned arguments in there. I don't agree with them, but its hard to fault him for the logic of his opinion. I'll forward the message to you. Haha thanks. Yeah I have ranted enough about the book that is ON TOPIC didn't want to rant about book that is OFF TOPIC as well. @Artein Alot it, I think, has to do with personal taste, what suspends disbelief/what does not for different individuals, and expectations and preconceptions about how certain aspects of 40K are. While we can compare the books on bit more objective grounds of quality of prose, flow of writing, grammatical errors, etc, alot of it breaks down to what "flavor", if you will, you like your various 40K. ....that being said anyone who disagrees with me is DEAD WRONG! FOREVER! :D Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2854120 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Shady Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I assume it was ill received mainly because it did not contain any Primarchs and wasn't about any of the events we already knew about, and of course because it was largely about the Ultramarines. It was ill received because it's bad. I tend to agree that some of the less Primarch-heavy books tend to get bad press but in this case it was well deserved. This and the first Dark Angels book (which was fairly Primarchy) are the only HH books I've not re-read at least once and I have no intention of doing so. This. I don't think BC is suited to the void battles. It lacked a certain quality. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/235951-battle-for-the-abyss/page/2/#findComment-2855775 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.