Dunn and McNeil @ Salute 2012

[Conn Eremon]

We've also seen a lot of traitor legions with loyalist factions thanks to the Horus Heresy series. Some of the most popular characters are these surviving loyalists. It stands to reason that there'd be the reverse among the loyalist legions, those who side with Horus for whatever reason. That doesn't have to step on the Dark Angels toes at all.

[Legatus]

We've also seen a lot of traitor legions with loyalist factions thanks to the Horus Heresy series. Some of the most popular characters are these surviving loyalists. It stands to reason that there'd be the reverse among the loyalist legions, those who side with Horus for whatever reason.

I would object, and argue that loyalists among the traitor Legions are a very obvious occurance, since they had to choose between their Primarch or the Emperor, while the members of loyalist Legions on the other hand had no such choice to make. With the traitors, you had some that thought that the Emperor was cooler than their Primarch. It is far less likely that some loyalists thought that Horus was cooler than either their own Primarch or the Emperor.

 

 

That doesn't have to step on the Dark Angels toes at all.

Yes it does. If it was common and widely known that the other loyal Legions had members side with Horus, then the Dark Angels look silly making such a big fuss about it.

[Bearingtheword]

Maybe I have missed some reading, perhaps not, but I don't recall being left with the impression that the "Fallen" of the Dark Angels actually sided with Horus... I was left with the impression that they were "rebelling" against their Primarch (and through him the Emp), and his seeming to choose the Terran forces over the traditions of and those recruited from Caliban....

 

Yes Chaos (captital C) had a hand in fueling that fire but I just don't recall them choosing Horus, which is where a part of the Iron Hands appear to be headed. So I cannot see this as stepping on the Dark Angels fluff....

 

I'm gonna go back and re-read the two HH books that focus on the DA and see if I'm recollecting it correctly...

 

~BtW

[Legatus]

Yes Chaos (captital C) had a hand in fueling that fire but I just don't recall them choosing Horus, which is where a part of the Iron Hands appear to be headed. So I cannot see this as stepping on the Dark Angels fluff....

No, they were not siding with Horus, they were "just" turning to Chaos. But I would say it is the treason in general that is the issue here. So... same dif.

[Bearingtheword]

Yes Chaos (captital C) had a hand in fueling that fire but I just don't recall them choosing Horus, which is where a part of the Iron Hands appear to be headed. So I cannot see this as stepping on the Dark Angels fluff....

No, they were not siding with Horus, they were "just" turning to Chaos. But I would say it is the treason in general that is the issue here. So... same dif.

 

 

In lore, fluff, mythology and stories it is BIG dif....

 

~BtW

[Legatus]

The Dark Angels keep the Fallen a secret because they... turned to Chaos.

 

Everyone who sided with Horus... turned to Chaos.

 

Ergo, if other loyalist Legion had members side with Horus, and subsequently turn to Chaos, then the Dark Angels turning to Chaos would not really be that big of a deal.

[Bearingtheword]

There are a few things that I think are occurring here, in my opinion...

 

One: the stories, mythologies, fluff, whatever are finally being flushed out in much more detail by way of these novels and many other forms of writing within the genre, and as such they are shining varied shades of light, and thus creating shadows and greys, on what had previously been a "black and white" setting. This is a good thing regardless of how much people argue to the contrary. The "universe" of 40k is a constantly growing mythology. New things are being discovered, new things are being revealed. Our "universe" we spend our time gaming in and enjoy can only get better from it.

 

The second big issue I have noticed is the inability of some players to be flexible in their views of this gaming "universe". No problem, that's your prerogative. If someone doesn't want the Iron Hands in their "universe" to have any traitors then they simply don't. If someone wants Horus to not be the one turned and have Dorn be that Primarch instead, then go for it. It's their game...

 

Another thing that has personally bothered me is the fact, and I have stated it before, that most if not all the fluff up until recently has been coloured by the view and/or propaganda of The Imperium . Now we are finally starting to see that there is more to it than that stark "black/white" that led the Great Crusade to, in my opinion, fail.

 

 

Now to focus on how it IS different:

 

Yes, they are all traitors... BUT.... the reasons for it, and how far they "fall" is certainly not the same, and that is what leads to a good story, mythology, legend or piece of fluff....

The varying shades of grey that make up the reasons for choices made are integral pieces of a good story. If one cannot accept that then perhaps "bullet points' in a crib notes book is a better choice than a work of creative science fiction....

 

 

If one cannot, or is unwilling to shed that "black and white" view then they are going to be miserable. Be it perceived changes to old lore that never had been actually fleshed out before, or the inability to accept that there can be more to a story than exactly what's been told (e.g. "Know No Fear), or that the "loyalist" legions actually may have had some dissatisfied dissenters within them, or any other changes that are going to come down the line in any of the future HH books, because we know there will be.

 

And I think the DA keep the "Fallen" as their personal secret because it's the way their Legion has decided to deal with their perceived shame..... That doesn't mean that another legion is going to deal with that similar perceived shame in the exact same way....

Just my thoughts on it....

 

~BtW

[Conn Eremon]

I would object, and argue that loyalists among the traitor Legions are a very obvious occurance, since they had to choose between their Primarch or the Emperor, while the members of loyalist Legions on the other hand had no such choice to make. With the traitors, you had some that thought that the Emperor was cooler than their Primarch. It is far less likely that some loyalists thought that Horus was cooler than either their own Primarch or the Emperor.

 

Yes it does. If it was common and widely known that the other loyal Legions had members side with Horus, then the Dark Angels look silly making such a big fuss about it.

 

Horus was clearly a major league influential character in the Great Crusade. Almost on par with the Emperor, especially with those who never experienced the Emperor's presence. The idea that some loyalists, especially those that might have strong connections with the lodges, might side with Horus and his public view rather than the Emperor is not all that far-fetched. Outside of the universe, we know that his rebellion is nothing more than Chaos' attempt at ruining humanity, but in universe Horus had what appeared to be good intentions. Removing a person who was beginning to make changes not in the Legions' best interests, to many of their eyes, and return to the ways that the Legions were made for. Now that the Horus Heresy series has shown us that the Primarchs weren't simply blindly followed, that they didn't command absolute loyalty, there would definitely be dissidents among the loyal Legions. Certainly not on par with the dissidents among the traitor Legions, but not nonexistent.

 

What we have with the Dark Angels is a major faction that sided with Chaos, not Horus, that resulted in the decimation of the Legion and destruction of their homeworld. What is being alluded to with the Iron Hands is a small faction that sides with Horus. This is not stepping on Dark Angel toes. Having renegade Iron Hands, renegade anything, does not belittle the Dark Angels Legion and their dark secret.

[Legatus]

One: the stories, mythologies, fluff, whatever are finally being flushed out in much more detail by way of these novels and many other forms of writing within the genre, and as such they are shining varied shades of light, and thus creating shadows and greys, on what had previously been a "black and white" setting. This is a good thing regardless of how much people argue to the contrary. The "universe" of 40k is a constantly growing mythology. New things are being discovered, new things are being revealed. Our "universe" we spend our time gaming in and enjoy can only get better from it.

With authors proclaiming in their novels that Space Marines are immortal, that the Blood Angels never gave much on the Codex Astartes, or that said Codex doesn't really work, that point of view seems almost comically deluded. Arbitrary retcons are most definitely not a good thing. For no fictional universe. Aside from destroying any sense of continuity, it can (and does, frequently) also change things for the worse. The Battle for Calth as described in the Collected Visions book was epic. The retconned Battle for Calth described in 'Know no Fear' is a joke.

 

Yes, the involvement of professional authors for a fictional setting can provide a positive influence in the development of the setting. But when those authors miss details in their research, fail to properly communicate all minor elements with other authors, or simply have ideas for the setting that aren't exactly gold, then such an influence can just as easily be a harmful one. And when there are too many authors involved, that is almost inevitable.

 

 

And I think the DA keep the "Fallen" as their personal secret because it's the way their Legion has decided to deal with their perceived shame..... That doesn't mean that another legion is going to deal with that similar perceived shame in the exact same way....

No, it just makes the Dark Angels look silly.

[Billuriye]

The Battle for Calth as described in the Collected Visions book was epic. The retconned Battle for Calth described in 'Know no Fear' is a joke.

 

How is that a joke?

[Gree]

With authors proclaiming in their novels that Space Marines are immortal, that the Blood Angels never gave much on the Codex Astartes, or that said Codex doesn't really work, that point of view seems almost comically deluded. Arbitrary retcons are most definitely not a good thing. For no fictional universe. Aside from destroying any sense of continuity, it can (and does, frequently) also change things for the worse. The Battle for Calth as described in the Collected Visions book was epic. The retconned Battle for Calth described in 'Know no Fear' is a joke.

 

Yes, the involvement of professional authors for a fictional setting can provide a positive influence in the development of the setting. But when those authors miss details in their research, fail to properly communicate all minor elements with other authors, or simply have ideas for the setting that aren't exactly gold, then such an influence can just as easily be a harmful one. And when there are too many authors involved, that is almost inevitable.

 

Well, there you have a whole different kettle of fish. Is what you think of as the background and theme the same as what Games Workshop thinks of as its background and theme? Given that Graham McNeill was a member of the design studio and Abnett is GW’s most favoured and promoted author, and that they was published, it would seem that the Ultramarines and Calth aren't who you thought they were. They're the source of the material. You might think a different way could be better, but ultimately, they're the authority on the subject.

[Legatus]

How is that a joke?

Well, it is somewhat amusing how an author can honestly go from an account where the Primarch is said to have shouldered an entire world wide campaign plus protracted space warfare to a revised account where the Primarch only leads one minor action. It is almost hilarious, if you think about it. He actually did that. To subtitle a book "The Battle for Calth" when we only really follow a single Captain and only briefly are told about how there probably are more Marines fighting somewhere else on the world is also a very interesting choice. Considering the time frame this book had been released in, perhaps it is just a very elaborate april fools joke.

[Gree]

How is that a joke?

Well, it is somewhat amusing how an author can honestly go from an account where the Primarch is said to have shouldered an entire world wide campaign plus protracted space warfare to a revised account where the Primarch only leads one minor action. It is almost hilarious, if you think about it. He actually did that. To subtitle a book "The Battle for Calth" when we only really follow a single Captain and only briefly are told about how there probably are more Marines fighting somewhere else on the world is also a very interesting choice. Considering the time frame this book had been released in, perhaps it is just a very elaborate april fools joke.

 

The argument you pose – That the Iron Hands turning traitor makes little sense, that the Battle of Calth was cheapened-are good. I'm actually with you on that point. But to be frank you lose me utterly with your zeal, and if I may say so, possibly others as well. I only recall a mere handful of people who outright hated KNF-even those readers who didn't immediately take to the rooftops to proclaim its brilliance seem to think it was pretty good on the whole. Most people in fact, if I venture forth, do seem to really like it.

 

Not that that invalidates the tastes of those who didn't like it, but it does make them surprising to hear. Just as you'd be surprised to hear (hyperbole intentional) "Shakespeare - what a talentless hack", "Sachin Tendulkar - county grade at best",, or "Ludwig van Beethoven - he's no Billy Joel".

[Billuriye]

Well, it is somewhat amusing how an author can honestly go from an account where the Primarch is said to have shouldered an entire world wide campaign plus protracted space warfare to a revised account where the Primarch only leads one minor action. It is almost hilarious, if you think about it. He actually did that. To subtitle a book "The Battle for Calth" when we only really follow a single Captain and only briefly are told about how there probably are more Marines fighting somewhere else on the world is also a very interesting choice. Considering the time frame this book had been released in, perhaps it is just a very elaborate april fools joke.

 

Minor action? He led an assault to heart of treachery and rooted it out.

Literally

And Ultras turning the game from a certain death to a vicious counter attack without their Primarch is more dramatic and telling for them IMHO. Personally RG leading a strategically brilliant attack with a well established communication with his legion is not epic, it is just expected. Ultras pulled off unexpected.

[Gree]

Yeah, I’m not sure how Guilliman’s action is “minor” considering it helped end the entire battle.

[Legatus]

Minor action? He led an assault to heart of treachery and rooted it out.

Yeah, I’m not sure how Guilliman’s action is “minor” considering it helped end the entire battle.

Guilliman's Actions in the Battle for Calth (Collected Visions, p. 164):

Guilliman began to organise a series of hit and run counterattacks with the few ships able to operate. (...) Time and time again the Word Bearers battleships were isolated and destroyed. (...) Even so, the loyalists faced a foe that outnumbered and outgunned them. (...)

Even as he directed his crippled fleet, Guilliman was also sending orders planetside to his beleagured troops on the ground. (...) Each and every pocket of resistance had been assessed with lightning speed and a plan formulated to increase the success of a defence against the traitors. Clear, concise orders were being broadcast to the defenders and the Ultramarines began to fight back.

Guilliman's only action (aside from instructing Captain Ventanus to attack a ground installation) in the Battle for Calth (Know no Fear, p. 368):

The first kill squad of fifty Ultramarines, led by Guilliman, Heutonicus and Thiel, assembles in the flaggship's teleportation terminal.

Leading continuous fleet actions while also directing a global ground campaign.

 

vs

 

Instructing one ground force to attack a target and leading a 50 man boarding action.

 

 

In one of those accounts, Guilliman fought a global campaign. In the other, he led a minor boarding action of 50 Marines. That is... not anywhere close in terms of accomplishment. One is an epic global battle for a world. One is a small skirmish of insignificant proportion, which just happens to be the single action that decides the entire Battle.

[Lord Ragnarok]

Gree provide one post as a retort. Legatus accept Gree's retort as an opinion and move on. Any posts beyond what is suggested here will be deleted.

[Gree]

Okay then, here it is as you suggested.

 

*snip*

 

I am not concerned with the events described in Collected Visions. I am ignoring it as it's really not relevant for Know No Fear. In the proper context of the events of Know No Fear, Guilliman’s assault was a major one in the context of the strategic and tactical operations. It helped decide the battle. In comparison of scale with the past fluff it was minor, but as a deciding factor in a military engagement it is quite major in the proper context of the battle itself as of the current fluff.

 

But perhaps you might see Guilliman accomplishment as an indirect one? KNF's depiction indirectly lent a lot more credence to the discipline and strategic wherewithal of the Ultramarines than would have Guilliman being the sole architect of the Ultramarine counter-offensive. The imprint of Guilliman’s leadership, his influence on the legion’s methodology and psychology alone were enough to enable his lieutenants to improvise, regroup, and produce a response to the Word Bearer’s surprise attack. Turns out, Guilliman didn’t need to lead in every theatre. His sons were competent enough to lead without his immediate guidance.

 

While the first thing Guilliman does is when the attack begins is to gather information, and the last thing he does is to lead a decisive raid on the only strategic location where he can save the world, the effect of the story shows off the Ultramarines as what we might expect from Codex Space Marines. There's foreshadowing of what the Ultramarines will become - the red helmets, the nature of a force which surgically chooses targets to obliterate rather than applying numbers - and irony yet to come, in the way the Ultramarines will adopt the patterns of Chapters and Chaplains in the Word Bearer style - but they're Codex Space Marines here. They're not exemplary. They're not Ultramarines, they're 'just' Ultramarines.

 

I can understand the disappointment that Guilliman himself didn't command the defence of the world in excruciating detail, but at the same time, if he actually had done that his Ultramarines would look pathetic, like they can't make a decision for themselves. Instead we see the vital figures: the censured Space Marine who devises the non-Codex tactic of using alien weapons. The Space Marine who thinks of painted eldar as a counter-measure against false friends. These are the warriors who analysed their own behaviour as they would any enemy, identified their own weaknesses, and imagined unorthodox tactics. These are Guilliman's warriors, and I don't think their martial pride is diminished by the absence of the primarch's direct orders. I'm satisfied that the Ultramarines were sufficiently Ultramarinely.

 

The novel focused on the key moments surrounding the betrayal, the attack, the devastation, the Word Bearers' final strike, and how that strike was thwarted. The whole Mark of Calth idea, and the excerpts of Guilliman's textbook, frame the novel as edited highlights which describe the decisive moments, not a documentary about every moment. More things happened on Calth than are shown here (as Oath of Moment also illustrated).

 

The Ultramarines are meant to be the jack-of-all-trades, an all rounder force, and the novel shows precisely that. Defensive engagements where they slug it out, multi-pronged counter attacks, strategic redeployments, boarding operations, counter-boarding operations, fighting retreats (okay perhaps a bit of a gradiose claim in the case of the 111th and 112th companies legging it from titans but still), as well as the key UM trait of adaptability as shown by Thiel's quick adoption of tactics for fighting daemons (flames and blades).

[Legatus]

But perhaps you might see Guilliman accomplishment as an indirect one? KNF's depiction indirectly lent a lot more credence to the discipline and strategic wherewithal of the Ultramarines than would have Guilliman being the sole architect of the Ultramarine counter-offensive. The imprint of Guilliman’s leadership, his influence on the legion’s methodology and psychology alone were enough to enable his lieutenants to improvise, regroup, and produce a response to the Word Bearer’s surprise attack. Turns out, Guilliman didn’t need to lead in every theatre. His sons were competent enough to lead without his immediate guidance.

You have a point there. Though I do not necessarily think the novel sold that well either. Much as I don't think the novel described the actions you mentioned. You just already knew that such actions happened beforehand. It is not really what the novel described. But if those are the reasons for why you appreciate the novel, then that's why you appreciate the novel.

 

Disagreement acknowledged. For this thread at least.

[karden00]

Okay then, here it is as you suggested.

 

*snip*

 

I am not concerned with the events described in Collected Visions. I am ignoring it as it's really not relevant for Know No Fear. In the proper context of the events of Know No Fear, Guilliman’s assault was a major one in the context of the strategic and tactical operations. It helped decide the battle. In comparison of scale with the past fluff it was minor, but as a deciding factor in a military engagement it is quite major in the proper context of the battle itself as of the current fluff.

 

But perhaps you might see Guilliman accomplishment as an indirect one? KNF's depiction indirectly lent a lot more credence to the discipline and strategic wherewithal of the Ultramarines than would have Guilliman being the sole architect of the Ultramarine counter-offensive. The imprint of Guilliman’s leadership, his influence on the legion’s methodology and psychology alone were enough to enable his lieutenants to improvise, regroup, and produce a response to the Word Bearer’s surprise attack. Turns out, Guilliman didn’t need to lead in every theatre. His sons were competent enough to lead without his immediate guidance.

 

While the first thing Guilliman does is when the attack begins is to gather information, and the last thing he does is to lead a decisive raid on the only strategic location where he can save the world, the effect of the story shows off the Ultramarines as what we might expect from Codex Space Marines. There's foreshadowing of what the Ultramarines will become - the red helmets, the nature of a force which surgically chooses targets to obliterate rather than applying numbers - and irony yet to come, in the way the Ultramarines will adopt the patterns of Chapters and Chaplains in the Word Bearer style - but they're Codex Space Marines here. They're not exemplary. They're not Ultramarines, they're 'just' Ultramarines.

 

I can understand the disappointment that Guilliman himself didn't command the defence of the world in excruciating detail, but at the same time, if he actually had done that his Ultramarines would look pathetic, like they can't make a decision for themselves. Instead we see the vital figures: the censured Space Marine who devises the non-Codex tactic of using alien weapons. The Space Marine who thinks of painted eldar as a counter-measure against false friends. These are the warriors who analysed their own behaviour as they would any enemy, identified their own weaknesses, and imagined unorthodox tactics. These are Guilliman's warriors, and I don't think their martial pride is diminished by the absence of the primarch's direct orders. I'm satisfied that the Ultramarines were sufficiently Ultramarinely.

 

The novel focused on the key moments surrounding the betrayal, the attack, the devastation, the Word Bearers' final strike, and how that strike was thwarted. The whole Mark of Calth idea, and the excerpts of Guilliman's textbook, frame the novel as edited highlights which describe the decisive moments, not a documentary about every moment. More things happened on Calth than are shown here (as Oath of Moment also illustrated).

 

The Ultramarines are meant to be the jack-of-all-trades, an all rounder force, and the novel shows precisely that. Defensive engagements where they slug it out, multi-pronged counter attacks, strategic redeployments, boarding operations, counter-boarding operations, fighting retreats (okay perhaps a bit of a gradiose claim in the case of the 111th and 112th companies legging it from titans but still), as well as the key UM trait of adaptability as shown by Thiel's quick adoption of tactics for fighting daemons (flames and blades).

 

 

 

This is a good exchange, and I hope the mods dont end it.

I feel that Gree has touched upon a great point here, but I also feel it could and perhaps should be taken a step further. From the 2nd paragraph from the bottom: "The novel focused on the key moments surrounding the betrayal, the attack, the devastation, the Word Bearers' final striek, and how that strike was thwarted."

 

I want to adress Legs here specifically, since he has the biggest bone on this one (and I dont mean to suggest that he is necessarily wrong to feel so).

Is there not room for Roby G to direct the rest of the Battle of Calth as described in the previous fluff, even if it does (even if unsatisfactorily) this happens After the scope of the novel? Sure, the ODG Might make this phase redundant, but there is room for it. Perhaps the Grid was over used in the initial phase of hte attack, and did not have the ammo/energy to be a key player in the second phase? Perhaps despite its overstated power, the Word Bearers fleet was still enough of a threat that it wasnt simply 'game over' once the grid had been reclaimed, and that this was where our beloved Roby G really shone?

I for one dont mind when things get a little more focused. When GrimDark fluff gets written, there is a tendency for it to become predictable-swoopings hawks fighting gargoyles, assault marines fighting raptors, dreadnoughts fighting carnificies and bla bla bla. To have a more limited view of (it must be remembered) what is one stage of a larger battle (isnt that what every 40k game is supposed to be as well?) I think actually presents more options, when done correctly.

[Sons of Horus]

Can't say I like the idea of traitor Iron Hands but I'll wait and see. Nice to know that even the authors consider Ferrus deader than dead ;). Good news on the Iron Warriors too

[Liquidice]

After reading the Primarch novella's, there is obvious evidence of them setting up a rift between iron hands. I will not go into detail, but they set the story up real well.