What if Guilliman became Warmaster?

[Veteran Sergeant]

this thread is awesome! im reading know no fear at the moment and im very much liking how guilliman is portrayed in it...

 

Roboute is basically captain america and cyclops from x-men..and that is not a bad thing in my opinion! :D

This is a fair assessment.

 

Because Guilliman is so misunderstood, I've done some pretty in-depth character assessments of him. One of his biggest flaw was being too loyal. He wasn't dog-loyal like Russ. He was loyal because he was fully on board with the program. He understood the Emperor's greater plan (or, more accurately, he understood all of the plan that he'd been told about), and he embraced it. He took the Emperor's word, and believed in the cause. When the Emperor told him to destroy Monarchia, he did it because that was his duty. He didn't hate Lorgar. When the Emperor fell, he put the Imperium back together the way he thought the Emperor wanted it. The important distinction is "the way he thought". What he did probably wasn't truly in line with the Emperor's Will. Only with Guilliman's understanding of it. Ultimately, this comes into play with the way the Imperium has turned out. In the absence of the Emperor, Guilliman was undoubtedly the best suited to take over as the Emperor II. However, he understood his duty as fighting humanity's wars, not leading them. Guilliman wasn't able to adapt and recognize that his new duty was to assume control of the Imperium. All of the other primarchs knew Guilliman was the best for it. Even Lorgar admitted it, and he hated Guilliman. When Guilliman stepped down from the High Lords and returned to the Ultramarines, he left the Imperium in the hands of a corrupt council, and it slowly fell victim to that human corruptibility.

 

In that way, you might even suggest that Guilliman was, unintentionally, the greatest villain of the 40K universe. When the Imperium needed him, he stepped down because he was too loyal to the memory of the Emperor that he stayed true to the idea that the pirmarchs were not meant to rule, but to fight. If Guilliman had been there to design and watch over the Administratum, Imperial Guard, etc, the Imperium would probably be a much different, far less grimdark place. He'd have built it in the image of Ultramar, which is much closer to Pre-Heresy Imperium. Of course, he'd have also blocked the rise of the Ecclesiarchy too, which has been the single most negative force in the Imperium, choking its development and creating a fear state.

[chaplain belisarius]

@veteran segeant-that is an awesome post! (if you feel like posting your in depth analysis of guilliman, id be very happy to read it!)

 

also, dont suppose you have done a in depth analysis of dorn? (dorn and guilliman are my favourite primarchs)

 

back on topic-sorry about that! :)

 

(muses if guilliman is a bit like ultra-magnus from transformers-thoughts?)

[eyeslikethunder]

he'd have also blocked the rise of the Ecclesiarchy

And defeat the Emperor's plan of becoming a god.....

[Captain Idaho]

this thread is awesome! im reading know no fear at the moment and im very much liking how guilliman is portrayed in it...

 

Roboute is basically captain america and cyclops from x-men..and that is not a bad thing in my opinion! :)

This is a fair assessment.

 

Because Guilliman is so misunderstood, I've done some pretty in-depth character assessments of him. One of his biggest flaw was being too loyal. He wasn't dog-loyal like Russ. He was loyal because he was fully on board with the program. He understood the Emperor's greater plan (or, more accurately, he understood all of the plan that he'd been told about), and he embraced it. He took the Emperor's word, and believed in the cause. When the Emperor told him to destroy Monarchia, he did it because that was his duty. He didn't hate Lorgar. When the Emperor fell, he put the Imperium back together the way he thought the Emperor wanted it. The important distinction is "the way he thought". What he did probably wasn't truly in line with the Emperor's Will. Only with Guilliman's understanding of it. Ultimately, this comes into play with the way the Imperium has turned out. In the absence of the Emperor, Guilliman was undoubtedly the best suited to take over as the Emperor II. However, he understood his duty as fighting humanity's wars, not leading them. Guilliman wasn't able to adapt and recognize that his new duty was to assume control of the Imperium. All of the other primarchs knew Guilliman was the best for it. Even Lorgar admitted it, and he hated Guilliman. When Guilliman stepped down from the High Lords and returned to the Ultramarines, he left the Imperium in the hands of a corrupt council, and it slowly fell victim to that human corruptibility.

 

In that way, you might even suggest that Guilliman was, unintentionally, the greatest villain of the 40K universe. When the Imperium needed him, he stepped down because he was too loyal to the memory of the Emperor that he stayed true to the idea that the pirmarchs were not meant to rule, but to fight. If Guilliman had been there to design and watch over the Administratum, Imperial Guard, etc, the Imperium would probably be a much different, far less grimdark place. He'd have built it in the image of Ultramar, which is much closer to Pre-Heresy Imperium. Of course, he'd have also blocked the rise of the Ecclesiarchy too, which has been the single most negative force in the Imperium, choking its development and creating a fear state.

 

I believe you are making assumptions. There is no information that states he actually stepped down, that the High Lords were corrupt at the time or that he even ran the Imperium.

 

In fact the very ititle of Guilliman confirmed he was one of the High Lords, which means he couldn't have been solely in charge. The Imperium is run by a group of highly factional, self serving organisations so it's entirely likely Guilliman wasn't quite as in control as you might think. Even Guilliman could be held to ransom if the Navigators refused to work alongside his armies, for example.

[MadDoc]

And defeat the Emperor's plan of becoming a god.....

Oh no, one fan-spec theory countering another fan-spec theory... how tragic. ^_^

[Veteran Sergeant]

I believe you are making assumptions. There is no information that states he actually stepped down, that the High Lords were corrupt at the time or that he even ran the Imperium.

Of course it's an assumption. There was never any suggestion it was anything else. I'm simply taking what we know about Guilliman and reconciling what we know about the Imperium. And the High Lords at the time didn't have to be corrupt, but even with rejuvenat, eventually they die. The Primarchs may or may not be immortal. And eventually, we know the Imperium became corrupt and disparate. Something Guilliman could have possibly prevented had he taken the title of Lord Commander and turned it into being the Emperor. However, since we know he returns to the Ultramarines (to fight the Alpha Legion and eventually be wounded fighting Fulgrim), the implication is that eventually he had to have stopped being the Lord Commander.

 

Even Guilliman could be held to ransom if the Navigators refused to work alongside his armies, for example.

In theory, but that's unlikely. The Navigators derive all their power from providing a service, not from refusing it. Had they gone on strike, the heads of the Navigator houses would have simply been replaced by more pliable members of the families. Guilliman was hardly one to have suffered dissent if he had felt that his duty was to rule the Imperium. The Navigators are hardly a unified front, and Guilliman controlled the entire might of the Imperial military as the Lord Commander.

 

I know it's easy as an Ultramarines player to become defensive about Guilliman because he takes a lot of undeserved criticism. But I'm far from a Guilliman critic. I actually really like his character. He's one of the most intriguing of the primarchs. But, part of that intrigue is recognizing what were his likely flaws.

[Captain Idaho]

I know it's easy as an Ultramarines player to become defensive about Guilliman because he takes a lot of undeserved criticism. But I'm far from a Guilliman critic. I actually really like his character. He's one of the most intriguing of the primarchs. But, part of that intrigue is recognizing what were his likely flaws.

 

You're preaching to the choir man. I'm well aware he has flaws, but I don't agree with your analysis. The way you've described him was this:

 

When the Imperium needed him, he stepped down because he was too loyal to the memory of the Emperor that he stayed true to the idea that the pirmarchs were not meant to rule, but to fight. If Guilliman had been there to design and watch over the Administratum, Imperial Guard, etc, the Imperium would probably be a much different, far less grimdark place. He'd have built it in the image of Ultramar, which is much closer to Pre-Heresy Imperium. Of course, he'd have also blocked the rise of the Ecclesiarchy too, which has been the single most negative force in the Imperium, choking its development and creating a fear state.

 

You're essentially blaming the problems with the Imperium on Guilliman NOT taking over. I disagree because him taking over was not within his scope, and you over estimate his capacity to remould an entire universe, not to mention underestimate the capacity of other Imperial factions to maintain their positions at the expense of any greater good.

[Vesper]

And defeat the Emperor's plan of becoming a god.....

Oh no, one fan-spec theory countering another fan-spec theory... how tragic. ;)

 

You have my respect, MadDoc.

[Smirnov]

I think Guilliman would have simply failed. Emperor appointed Horus knowing that only Horus was able to cope with all that came behinf the title of Warmaster. Even if Emperor had foreknowledge of coming Heresy, he still chose Horus. Why? Because he wanted Heresy to happen? Or he knew that only Horus had the chance to pull it through? Or that any other candidate would have made it far worse affair? If Emperor knew nothing of the coming Heresy, he still chose Horus as best of the best, keeping in mind that others may fail or won't be as successful as Horus.

 

In my opinoin charisma and leadership is key here. Guilliman may be a great administrator and thinker, but Horus was so much more to other Primarchs, and Warmaster needed that first of all. No one objected to Horus being Warmaster. Some said there were other candidates, but no one said Emperor made a wrong choice. I'm sure that Guilliman would have lacked that king of support. More than one Primarch viewed himself as an equal to him, and at least Lorgar held a grudge.

 

One scenario I can imagine is Guilliman starting to enforce his vision on other legions, and more independent-minded going rogue. Night Lords were almost rogue at the start of heresy. What would have happened if Guilliman tried to censor Angron? Or tear out his Nails?

 

It may have ended in another Heresy, either with Lorgar openly rebelling or Guilliman pushing too hard, or he may just have lost it, so that Emperor would have had to abandon his new project and come back to the crusade to fix everything.

 

 

Of course, we have a tendency of chaos already corrupting would-be traitor legions, which lessens the role Horus played in starting Heresy. Up to the point that it was not Horus, but Lorgar, who was responsible for everything. But that's dull. I want to believe that Chaos was wiser, that it have tried to sway all legions, but succeseded only with nine of them, and only because Horus was there for them (well, most of them). On the other hand, would have Lorgar and his little coven stopped the spread of corruption if Guilliman was named Warmaster? Wouldn't it have been far too temptin to corrupt Guilliman? THAT would have been a slap to the face, as Kor Phaeron clearly felt in 'Know no Fear'.

 

 

One question stands - if Guilliman would have been a better Warmaster, why wasn't he named one?

[Legatus]

I think Guilliman would have simply failed. Emperor appointed Horus knowing that only Horus was able to cope with all that came behinf the title of Warmaster.

The Emperor thinking that Horus was the best choice and the Emperor thinking Horus was the only choice are two different things. We know that the former is true. The latter is a baseless assumption.

 

 

One question stands - if Guilliman would have been a better Warmaster, why wasn't he named one?

I am not sure that question needs to be asked, because that was not the premise of this thread. But maybe someone in this thread made that assertion? I don't remember.

 

I would say the loyal Horus was the better choice for Warmaster. But then he didn't stay loyal, so in hindsight we know that Guilliman would actually have been a better choice. He did not have the support from most Primarchs like Horus, but since Horus took those Primarchs that would not have supported Guilliman and led them against the Emperor, that argument is completely invalidated.

[Smirnov]

And we assume that Guilliman is Draigo in disguise? That he is incorruptable and stuff? I don't see why chaos would just back down if Guilliman was named Warmaster. Horus was the best (because he was named Warmaster), and Chaos broke him. I can't see why chaos wouldn't break others. So much as I would love to see Dorn as Warmaster serving the perfect Imperium of his father, that could not possibly happen.

 

When making any suggestions about who would/could/may have been a Warmaster, I take two things into equation. First - Primarch status pre-heresy. What would it have been, if there was no Heresy? And then add chaos into the equation.

 

If I remember right, in his final moment of clarity, Horus states that Sanguinius should have been Warmaster. And I agree that only Great Angel was probably equal to Horus. But (and it's my opinion on the matter) Sanguinius has too many doubts. He would always ask himself if he was doing the right thing, if it was the best choice. And it would have been his downfall. Sanguinius may have been a better of two brother, but he doubted that. Horus may have been lesser of the two, but he never doubted that he is the one for the job.

 

I'm sure that all other Primarchs, who were considered for the role of Warmaster (hardly Emperor ever thought about making Angron or Curze his proxy), had similar crucial flaw in their nature, that prevented them earning the title. 'Know No Fear' suggests that Guillimans flaw was that he has 'outgrown' the role of Warmaster, but that may be just wishful thinking on the part of Ultramarines - all legionaries tend to view their Primarch as best of the best of the best, the bestest of them all in all eternity. All Primarch had their flaws, I hardly imagine anyone doubting that. If there was one flawless Primarch, there would be no need for other Primarchs. Every one had his uses, had his fortes and downsides, and it goes for everyone, Guilliman included - as we are talking about him, not Dorn or Sanguinius or Lion.

 

As it is stated, that Guilliman and Ultramerines were highly successful during the Crusade, i can only imagine that Guilliman lacked communication and leadership skills to lead other Primarchs. And I don't mean he was a bad commander, but that he wouldn't have been able to lead all legions. Like, look at me. I'm clever, cunning, so handsome, that I have to carry aroung exsessive weight just to give other men a competing chance. I would have made a great primarch, but I just lack the ability to come into a room of my equals and say 'hey guys, let's go burn Terra down!' knowing that at least half of present in the said room would follow. Same with Guilliman. I imagine that he would have had a fallout with some of the Primarch, slowing or even stalling the Crusade in it's track. He may have spent too much time organising the infrastructure of the new Imperium, leaving little room to actually conquesting the galaxy - after all, one of the first ideas behind Horus falling was that being a Warmaster and managing the galaxy in Emperors name was too much even for a Primarch.

 

And now we add chaos. I'm sure, that if Chaos willed it, it would have corrupted Guilliman. Not like it did with Horus. I would imagine something more down the lines of 'I know how to build a better Imperium, father is getting in the way'. After all, Horus was no less benevolent and loyal as any other Primarch before his fall. Chaos can perfectly turn a good guy into a monster. That's the tragedy of the Heresy - if all traitor primarchs were dorks, it would have been a boring tale. But knowing that some of them were the best of the lot, knowing that in the end the best have died, leaving the galaxy in the hands of the rest, makes the story of the Heresy so evoking.

[Rik Lightstar]

Out of interest, can anyone post a reference to Guilliman doing ANYTHING out of "Self-Interest" there don't seem to be any mentions of it, for anyone who has read the Wheel of Time series (and any who haven't really should), he seems to be a LOT like Galad from that series.

 

He does the RIGHT thing, NOT the easy thing, the nice thing, the popular thing, etc.

 

This may lose him some friends, but the point is, I've not yet seen a reference to a single selfish act on his part, this I think is why people struggle to associate with him.

 

Rik

[Smirnov]

As it goes with good statesman, they seldom do 'selfish' thing on a grand scale, and Guilliman was a good statesman. Take for example Cardinal Richelieu, who can be named one of the greatest politicians of the later era. He had one vision in mind - of great and god-fearing France. But did he live in povertry? No, he quite used the benefits that came with the seat. And he never intended to clear the road for someone else. He wanted to see France glorious and great, but that meant he had to be at the helm. Even Alexander the Great, who, as far as the legend goes, forced his soldiers to burn their riches so that they will be able to conquer more, wasn't going to step away from the throne. And he died in his palace in Babylon, richest city of them all.

 

So one not being selfish doesn't mean one is not reaping benefits of his position :)

[Captain Idaho]

As it goes with good statesman, they seldom do 'selfish' thing on a grand scale, and Guilliman was a good statesman. Take for example Cardinal Richelieu, who can be named one of the greatest politicians of the later era. He had one vision in mind - of great and god-fearing France. But did he live in povertry? No, he quite used the benefits that came with the seat. And he never intended to clear the road for someone else. He wanted to see France glorious and great, but that meant he had to be at the helm. Even Alexander the Great, who, as far as the legend goes, forced his soldiers to burn their riches so that they will be able to conquer more, wasn't going to step away from the throne. And he died in his palace in Babylon, richest city of them all.

 

So one not being selfish doesn't mean one is not reaping benefits of his position ;)

 

In other words you don't actually have an example of Guilliman acting selfishly, rather citing examples out of history that have no relevance to him! :)

 

You know, you do have some good points :P . It's not a question of Guilliman being incorruptible that would lead to Chaos not attempting to turn him as Warmaster, rather a case that Chaos wouldn't turn him because he wouldn't be able to command as large a rebellion amongst his brothers as Horus.

 

Hell, it's why I wouldn't support Guilliman as Warmaster despite being an Ultramarines fan. Only Horus could motivate the majority of the Primarchs so successfully. Without Chaos they would likely all be obedient to whoever the Emperor appointed out of the Primarchs capable of doing the job, but there would always be dissent - there even was with Horus.

 

For the record, I believe there should have been a trio of Warmasters in place. Guilliman, Horus and possibly Dorn. Sanguinius was good and my top choice for SOLE Warmaster, but was not needed if there were two others to muck in.

 

Think about it though; Horus musters the forces to conquer the realm, Dorn's expertise is put to use defending the realm and Guilliman organises the realm after conquest.

 

It would have been glorious!

 

He does the RIGHT thing, NOT the easy thing, the nice thing, the popular thing, etc.

 

This may lose him some friends, but the point is, I've not yet seen a reference to a single selfish act on his part, this I think is why people struggle to associate with him.

 

Certainly! These two lines pretty much sums up why he was viewed the way he was by his brother Primarchs.

[Smirnov]

In other words you don't actually have an example of Guilliman acting selfishly, rather citing examples out of history that have no relevance to him! :)

It's more like I don't want to. I have a respect for Ultramarines and Guilliman despite all the flak, and I feel bad bisecting the legion and primarch in what they did, what they did not and what they could or could not do. When I say that Guilliman wouldn't have been as successful Warmaster as Horus, I say not because I don't like Guilliman. If that was the case, I would vote for Dorn all the time ))

 

But still, Guilliman had 8 (500) worlds, while other Primarchs had one. And he had the largest legion, which means the largest fleet, and probably the largest army contingent to compliment the largest legion. All loyal to Guilliman and believing him to be second only to Emperor (if Chapter Masters voiced that thought, I'm sure regular marines thought as much). Is that not reaping some benefits? ;)

[Legatus]

And we assume that Guilliman is Draigo in disguise? That he is incorruptable and stuff?

I do assume that. Because the Chaos Codices since 2nd Edition tell us that "all Primarchs were sorely tested, and fully half of them failed that test". You can assume that the Chaos Gods "didn't really try", but they succeeded with eight of the other non-warmaster Primarchs, yet not with Guilliman (among the nine loyalists). And since it does say "sorely", I personally don't assume that Chaos didn't really try.

 

 

When I say that Guilliman wouldn't have been as successful Warmaster as Horus

...then we know from hindsight that you could not be more wrong, since Horus brought about the greatest conflict of the galaxy. But I know, I know, we are talking purely from a "if he had stayed loyal" point of view. As I said, with that premise in mind Horus was the better choice. However, what you vehemently argue in that longer post three posts up is how Guilliman couldn't possibly have done a decent job as Warmaster, not that Horus would have done a better job. And I don't think you really have any support for that. Yeah, some of the more trobling Primarchs couldn't deal with Guilliman criticizing their methods, but I would assume that those would then simply have kept to themselves, much like how Corax removed his Legion from Warmaster Horus' command. On the other Hand, Guilliman would not have abused Legions like the Iron Warriors like Horus did, so perhaps that could have prevented Perturabo from going over the edge. Even under a Warmaster Sanguinius some of the Primarchs would still have been problematic, though he would perhaps have been less direct with them, and more be able to reason with them than Guilliman would have been.

 

In short, I agree that "loyal Horus" was the better choice for Warmaster. I do not agree that Guilliman would have been incapable to do a decent job as Warmaster.

[Billuriye]

I do assume that. Because the Chaos Codices since 2nd Edition tell us that "all Primarchs were sorely tested, and fully half of them failed that test". You can assume that the Chaos Gods "didn't really try", but they succeeded with eight of the other non-warmaster Primarchs, yet not with Guilliman (among the nine loyalists). And since it does say "sorely", I personally don't assume that Chaos didn't really try.

 

They sure didn't try as hard as they did for Magnus, Horus, Lorgar or Sanguinius.

[Kol Saresk]

Actually they kind of did. Magnus had to go through the whole Apocalypse/end-of-the-world scenario before they escaped into the warp. Horus was on his death bed and had to have a servant of Chaos let the warp straight into his body by entering his psyche. Sanguinius went through a different apocalypse scenario were his Legion was almost exterminated at Signus Prime. The only reason they survived was because of the Black Rage/ Red Thirst. And Lorgar had to undergo the pilgrimage. His might not have been as physical as the others, but no less easier. He even had to go into the Eye and fight Ann'grath the Unbound.

[Kol Saresk]

Hate to double post but

 

In other words you don't actually have an example of Guilliman acting selfishly, rather citing examples out of history that have no relevance to him! :P

 

Could you do me a favor and define the context selfish as you want to see? Would it be Gulliman doing something strictly for himself with no others involved? Would it be doing something for others just so he can feel better? Would a matter of "petty" revenge be considered to be selfish?

[Billuriye]

Actually they kind of did. Magnus had to go through the whole Apocalypse/end-of-the-world scenario before they escaped into the warp. Horus was on his death bed and had to have a servant of Chaos let the warp straight into his body by entering his psyche. Sanguinius went through a different apocalypse scenario were his Legion was almost exterminated at Signus Prime. The only reason they survived was because of the Black Rage/ Red Thirst. And Lorgar had to undergo the pilgrimage. His might not have been as physical as the others, but no less easier. He even had to go into the Eye and fight Ann'grath the Unbound.

 

That was my point. Something must have gone wrong in transmission.

[Legatus]

They sure didn't try as hard as they did for Magnus, Horus, Lorgar or Sanguinius.

Magnus had to watch a brother Legion descend on his homeworld, which was what sealed the deal, but was by no means the initiation of his corruption.

 

But then Guilliman, too, had to watch a brother Legion raid one of his worlds. It just wasn't his single home world. And that had not been the first time that Guilliman's own "world" (as in, his life, not his planet) was being under attack. Before he was found by the Emperor, Guilliman's city was attacked by traitors, his foster father killed, while Guilliman had been away on a military campaign elsewhere on the planet. There were certainly opportunities of hardship as well as promises of power in Guilliman's life. After defeating the traitors on Macragge, he rose to power on that world, and united with the surrounding worlds to form a greater realm. During the Crusade, his Legion achieved more than most other, and grew to be the largest of them all. Times of hardship, or opportunities to seize power, both are potential ways to the dark side.

 

And of course, after the Heresy Guilliman briefly acted as Lord Commander over all Imperial forces, and it is worth pointing out that neither did that lead to him being corrupted, nor did he fail horribly at such a position.

[Billuriye]

But unlike Guilliman, Magnus didn't have much choice in the matter. In Prospero it was either Chaos or end of Thousand Sons and himself. Guilliman was tightly pressed in Calth, true, but never to the point where the only salvation came from Chaos. Same with flesh change. If he didn't take Tzeentch's aid, he would kiss his legion goodbye. Poor Magnus got played hard.

[Rik Lightstar]

Hate to double post but

 

In other words you don't actually have an example of Guilliman acting selfishly, rather citing examples out of history that have no relevance to him! :P

 

Could you do me a favor and define the context selfish as you want to see? Would it be Gulliman doing something strictly for himself with no others involved? Would it be doing something for others just so he can feel better? Would a matter of "petty" revenge be considered to be selfish?

 

Certainly, I think in this context it's ANYTHING that benefits Guilliman and/or his Legion to the detriment of either:

 

The Imperium as a whole,

Another Primarch or Legion,

An Imperial World.

 

But I'm open to other examples.

 

The emphasis on to the detriment is important though, the improvements to the Ultramar Segment for example benefited the Imperium, the introduction of the Codex reforms arguably took more power from Guilliman than ANY other loyal primarch.

 

Rik

[Legatus]

But unlike Guilliman, Magnus didn't have much choice in the matter.

He could have not continued to look into the acrane when the Emperor told him to stop. The fall of Magnus was not due to the Battle for Prospero. It had been orchestrated from the day of his arrival on that world, and at certain points in his life he potentially could have broken free of that destiny. Though the odds were perhaps stacked against him, and really that's what makes his background so interesting.

 

If Guilliman had not built the largest of the Legions, the Ultramarines would probably have been wiped out on Calth. Or perhaps he would have been offered arcane assistance, just like Magnus? But by creating a strong Legion, that fate was averted for him. This was purely incidental, of course (and it was of course also never intended by GW that Guilliman could have potentially joined the traitors), but on the other hand perhaps it was not just for a lack of trying on the part of the Chaos Gods, but also due to some of the choices he made during his life that meant he was not going to fall.

 

As I had suggested in another post (don't remember which thread), if upon his landing on Macragge Guilliman had been found by the would be traitor Gallan instead of the noble Konor, and had been raised by him instead, he would have turned out a different Primarch. In this instance the Emperor had intervened, telling Konor in a vision about the coming child.

 

I don't think GW even intended that Guilliman was ever in danger of turning, but you can see a lot of instances in his past where things could have gone the other way. If he had been raised by Gallan instead, he would have grown up with questionable values. The attack on his foster father could have affected him differently. His rise to power withing Ultramar could have gone to his head, so could have his imense success during the Crusade, or his position after the Heresy. The attack on Calth could have affected him differently, or could have destroyed/turned him if he had not built up his Legion.

[Rik Lightstar]

But unlike Guilliman, Magnus didn't have much choice in the matter. In Prospero it was either Chaos or end of Thousand Sons and himself. Guilliman was tightly pressed in Calth, true, but never to the point where the only salvation came from Chaos. Same with flesh change. If he didn't take Tzeentch's aid, he would kiss his legion goodbye. Poor Magnus got played hard.

 

Magnus, gave in, slowly and incrementally, with each tiny step justifiable to himself, (just 5 more minutes on Skyrim, just one more biscuit) we've all been there, he started to fall before the Emperor even found him.

 

Rik