Arkangilos Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Ok, so reading the other threads about primarchs and seeing how some seem bitter towards others, I got to wondering. How would the primarchs interact and how do they feel about Sanguinius (from what we know)? I mean, we know that he seemed to be liked by all of them so far. But what about Perturabo, or the Lion who is paranoid? Lorgar, or Mortarion? I figured Kurze probably would think he was foolish for having such great hopes and dreams for Humanity. I mean, he is a hard core pessimist, where as Sanguinius is all about optimism. I could see some love lost from his side too, or maybe even pity? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
amaze07 Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 I think it was Magnus saying at the Council of Nikaea,That Sanguinius tear's of sorrow where false or something along those line's which give me the impression that maybe Sanguinius was not completely liked! I would say Angron had a dislike for him as there legions where kinda the same shock troops etc.. but the world eaters not as Clean and Perfect as the Blood angels. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3080602 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andiana Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Magnus greeted Sanguinius with joy when they first arrived, i think it was more anger and bitterness at the result if he felt that way. Which is understandable as he felt betrayed. I guess we can only speculate until it's revealed in further books for all the relationships. As a Dark Angel fan i'd love to know the Lion's thoughts on all his brothers. But Sanguinius is suppossed to be loved by all, and i think that'd be a great and rare trait for the primarchs if they kept going. It makes his death all the more meaningful and tragic Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3080609 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billuriye Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Hard to say. I always found it strange that Lorgar made no allusions to Sanguinius in TFH. He's probably warmable but not very bondable. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3080663 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 I think it was Magnus saying at the Council of Nikaea,That Sanguinius tear's of sorrow where false or something along those line's Wasn't Magnus iirc, but the demon posing as a Thousand Sons (Amon?) in Prospero Burns. And we don't believe what demons say, do we? Besides, Sang was one of original promotors of the Librarium project, he can understand he was not too happy with Nikea Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3080667 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareddm Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I post this every time this discussion comes up, only because I feel it does an excellent job of describing the relationships between primarchs. http://menducia.atspace.com/primarchs/III.html It ties each of the primarchs to one of the major arcana of the tarot and then makes inference based on the relationships of the cards. It's been extremely accurate over the years. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081521 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirnov Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I post this every time this discussion comes up, only because I feel it does an excellent job of describing the relationships between primarchs. http://menducia.atspace.com/primarchs/III.html It ties each of the primarchs to one of the major arcana of the tarot and then makes inference based on the relationships of the cards. It's been extremely accurate over the years. Interresting read. There are some points, on which I tend to disagree, but still it's much more, than I ever forced myself to write down Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081547 Share on other sites More sharing options...
A D-B Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Hard to say. I always found it strange that Lorgar made no allusions to Sanguinius in TFH. He's probably warmable but not very bondable. That's something I wish the novels were slightly more, uh, "careful" with. Sanguinius being the most-liked is one thing. He's certainly the most popular primarch in the fandom, by a million miles. Always has been. But he's not the "best", in the sense of ultimate capability and competence. That's Horus. It's always been Horus, and that should be recognised without fail. Again, I like the idea in Horus Rising where Horus has doubts about himself, and ardently believes it should've been Sanguinius chosen as Warmaster. That's cool. But he's wrong, and that needs to bear out in the end. It needs to be shown that Horus was a valid choice. Horus was the First Primarch, the echo of the Emperor, and was chosen because he was the best of his brothers. I sense the edge of... fan service... when it's suggested that Sanguinius is somehow better, or more capable, in the series. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081555 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Juan Juarez Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 That's Horus. It's always been Horus, and that should be recognised without fail. Surely, given that he ultimately failed and "fell", Horus wasn't really the best of them after all? Look at all those who sided with the Imperium and the Emperor; Guilliman, Corax, Vulkan, beloved Dorn, they could just as easily have "turned from His light" in the opening stages as they became aware of events but did not. Failure is not the biggest sin, it's the fall that preceeded that failure and thus Horus I don't think can lay that claim; he was visited by temptation and was tempted. I realise the latter part makes me sound like some weird televangilist. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081560 Share on other sites More sharing options...
A D-B Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 That's Horus. It's always been Horus, and that should be recognised without fail. Surely, given that he ultimately failed and "fell", Horus wasn't really the best of them after all? Look at all those who sided with the Imperium and the Emperor; Guilliman, Corax, Vulkan, beloved Dorn, they could just as easily have "turned from His light" in the opening stages as they became aware of events but did not. Failure is not the biggest sin, it's the fall that preceeded that failure and thus Horus I don't think can lay that claim; he was visited by temptation and was tempted. I realise the latter part makes me sound like some weird televangilist. Not really. I'm talking specifically about the rank of Warmaster, and overall competence. There's no sense dragging in other variables (like what if Sanguinius was hit the with the anatheme, etc.) because that has varying levels of relevance. We don't know, and it doesn't really matter. The lore states, clearly, that Horus was the best. He was the finest general. The one who saved the Emperor's life. The one best-suited at encouraging the other primarchs' diverse traits to reach victory. The one with the best Legion. He was the one chosen as Warmaster. I think there's the risk of fan service to suggest otherwise, though I understand that Sanguinius is immensely popular with the fandom. The fact Horus was the brightest star is the very reason the Heresy is a tragedy. It's the core theme of the thing. It's why Lucifer falling was so magnificent, not Michael. There's really no arguing against that, with "But Michael's the best, he never fell." Naw. That misses the point completely. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081564 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Juan Juarez Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 That's Horus. It's always been Horus, and that should be recognised without fail. Surely, given that he ultimately failed and "fell", Horus wasn't really the best of them after all? Look at all those who sided with the Imperium and the Emperor; Guilliman, Corax, Vulkan, beloved Dorn, they could just as easily have "turned from His light" in the opening stages as they became aware of events but did not. Failure is not the biggest sin, it's the fall that preceeded that failure and thus Horus I don't think can lay that claim; he was visited by temptation and was tempted. I realise the latter part makes me sound like some weird televangilist. Not really. I'm talking specifically about the rank of Warmaster, and overall competence. There's no sense dragging in other variables (like what if Sanguinius was hit the with the anatheme, etc.) because that has varying levels of relevance. We don't know, and it doesn't really matter. The lore states, clearly, that Horus was the best. He was the finest general. The one who saved the Emperor's life. The one best-suited at encouraging the other primarchs' diverse traits to reach victory. The one with the best Legion. He was the one chosen as Warmaster. I think there's the risk of fan service to suggest otherwise, though I understand that Sanguinius is immensely popular with the fandom. The fact Horus was the brightest star is the very reason the Heresy is a tragedy. It's the core theme of the thing. It's why Lucifer falling was so magnificent, not Michael. There's really no arguing against that, with "But Michael's the best, he never fell." Naw. That misses the point completely. I can entirely see your point, I know how powerful "He was the best of us, but see how much farther he had to fall.." is but in my mind you can't fail in that way and still be the best. Obviously, that ignores the fact I'd misinterpreted your original point! Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081576 Share on other sites More sharing options...
A D-B Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Obviously, that ignores the fact I'd misinterpreted your original point! Only because I explained it like a goober. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081577 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Juan Juarez Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Obviously, that ignores the fact I'd misinterpreted your original point! Only because I explained it like a goober. Actually, this happens quite a lot and the common factor is me.. Make of that what you willl ^_^ Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081578 Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaplain belisarius Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 hmm..very interesting post on horus there...he was the only choice for warmaster. He was the best...but then he fell...which is a huge tragedy. Still makes you think "if horus fell, was he really the best choice?" just my thoughts on the matter....no offence intended... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081595 Share on other sites More sharing options...
A D-B Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 hmm..very interesting post on horus there...he was the only choice for warmaster. He was the best...but then he fell...which is a huge tragedy. Still makes you think "if horus fell, was he really the best choice?" Yep: The lore states, clearly, that Horus was the best. He was the finest general. The one who saved the Emperor's life. The one best-suited at encouraging the other primarchs' diverse traits to reach victory. The one with the best Legion. He was the one chosen as Warmaster. I think there's the risk of fan service to suggest otherwise, though I understand that Sanguinius is immensely popular with the fandom. The fact Horus was the brightest star is the very reason the Heresy is a tragedy. It's the core theme of the thing. It's why Lucifer falling was so magnificent, not Michael. There's really no arguing against that, with "But Michael's the best, he never fell." Yes, he was the best. Even the best can fall. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081596 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legatus Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I can entirely see your point, I know how powerful "He was the best of us, but see how much farther he had to fall.." is but in my mind you can't fail in that way and still be the best. Yes, in hindsight Horus obviously turned out not to have been that well suited for the position of Warmaster. But at the moment during the Great Crusade where the Emperor seeks to make one of the Primarchs Warmaster, Horus was objectively the best and the obvious choice. That has of course been the perspective A D-B has been refering to, while you, Captain Juan Juarez, are assessing it with hindsight. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081597 Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaplain belisarius Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Hmmm....i agree with legatus (get the feeling you can explain it better too) im kind of in two minds regarding horus-on the one hand, he was the best choice at the time...but future events seem to show that the emperor may of (gasp!) made a mistake... again..my thoughts...no offence intended... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081599 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veteran Sergeant Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 hmm..very interesting post on horus there...he was the only choice for warmaster. He was the best...but then he fell...which is a huge tragedy. Still makes you think "if horus fell, was he really the best choice?" just my thoughts on the matter....no offence intended... Obviously with a term like "best", you will have problems when there are no irrefutable, quantifiable measures. I mean, we could argue this in circles for days. Yes, Horus was the "best" of his brothers for the job of Warmaster when he was chosen. Yes, in hindsight Guilliman seems like a better choice since he was not corruptible as as good of a general, or Sanguinius because he wasn't corruptible and admired by all of his brothers. However, the obvious criteria that were set for "the best" revolved around the qualities the primarchs possessed at the moment Horus was selected. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081607 Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaplain belisarius Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 so...the emperor made an error of judgement?:down: (im joking!) It is very perplexing the whole "horus was the best but he fell, so was he really the best?" thought... do you reckon all the depressed/messed up/bittier primarchs hung out together at all?(perturabo, night haunter, mortarion etc) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081610 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veteran Sergeant Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Perhaps he was the best of the primarchs but not the best choice. :down: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081613 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WGXH Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Hard to say. I always found it strange that Lorgar made no allusions to Sanguinius in TFH. He's probably warmable but not very bondable. But he's not the "best", in the sense of ultimate capability and competence. That's Horus. It's always been Horus, and that should be recognised without fail. I think this can never be understated. It shows how insidious Chaos truly is. The best of us can fall. Nobody is infallible. People can say that their Primarch should have been Warmster for X reason or Y purpose. But ultimatly, that's missing the point. Perhaps Angron or Russ did have an edge over Horus in personal combat, but couldn't compare to him in charisma, leadership, strategy, so on and so forth. Horus *was* the greatest Primarch. If the Heresy had never happened, and the Great Crusade brought a new dawn for mankind, the foremost son of The Emperor would be Horus. There can be no doubt of that. Others would still shine brightly, but Horus is undeniably the greatest. It's part of the theme of the setting, I beleive. If you were to ask your average 40k fan who their favourite Inquisitor was, chances are it's Eisenhorn. and he's treading the same path as Horus is. That is why the Heresy is such a lamentable event. The very best of us can fall. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081620 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkangilos Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 Hard to say. I always found it strange that Lorgar made no allusions to Sanguinius in TFH. He's probably warmable but not very bondable. That's something I wish the novels were slightly more, uh, "careful" with. Sanguinius being the most-liked is one thing. He's certainly the most popular primarch in the fandom, by a million miles. Always has been. But he's not the "best", in the sense of ultimate capability and competence. That's Horus. It's always been Horus, and that should be recognised without fail. Again, I like the idea in Horus Rising where Horus has doubts about himself, and ardently believes it should've been Sanguinius chosen as Warmaster. That's cool. But he's wrong, and that needs to bear out in the end. It needs to be shown that Horus was a valid choice. Horus was the First Primarch, the echo of the Emperor, and was chosen because he was the best of his brothers. I sense the edge of... fan service... when it's suggested that Sanguinius is somehow better, or more capable, in the series. So how do you think Lorgar feels about Sanguinius? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081633 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pandion40 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Hard to say. I always found it strange that Lorgar made no allusions to Sanguinius in TFH. He's probably warmable but not very bondable. That's something I wish the novels were slightly more, uh, "careful" with. Sanguinius being the most-liked is one thing. He's certainly the most popular primarch in the fandom, by a million miles. Always has been. But he's not the "best", in the sense of ultimate capability and competence. That's Horus. It's always been Horus, and that should be recognised without fail. Again, I like the idea in Horus Rising where Horus has doubts about himself, and ardently believes it should've been Sanguinius chosen as Warmaster. That's cool. But he's wrong, and that needs to bear out in the end. It needs to be shown that Horus was a valid choice. Horus was the First Primarch, the echo of the Emperor, and was chosen because he was the best of his brothers. I sense the edge of... fan service... when it's suggested that Sanguinius is somehow better, or more capable, in the series. Interesting and I broadly aggree dispite being a bit of a Sanguinius fanboy. It seems a little out of left field though. i didnt see anyone posting about him being the best just discusing what the various primarchs think about him. good and bad. maybe i missed somthing. None of the quotes, except the horus one, about sanguinius i have read portray him as the best primarch. They do say he is amoungst the best H2H fighters out of his brothers. but that is a small part of what someone the best Primarch. I can understand some caution when mentioning an opinion on him though. His popularity means anything you write about a characters opinions of him is magnified. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3081682 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zynk Kaladin Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 I figured Kurze probably would think he was foolish for having such great hopes and dreams for Humanity. I mean, he is a hard core pessimist, where as Sanguinius is all about optimism. I could see some love lost from his side too, or maybe even pity? Funny how Sanguinius and Curze are my two favorite primarchs with almost polar opposite views about humanity. Anyway, I think Curze and Sanguinius would have gotten along quite neutrally at least until Night Haunter started to fall to his own madness. Once Curze went bonkers, then I can see the optimist/pessimist argument is pretty valid, but they wouldn't really have had time to talk to each other. As I recall, the only primarch Night Haunter really got along with was Fulgrim and was very distant towards others because he was the only primarch to grow up alone. Does anyone know what other primarchs Curze confided in about his visions? The only one I know about is Dorn and we all know where that went. In regards to Sanguinius, I don't think he's popular with the primarchs solely because everyone loved him dearly. Obviously he was very close to some of his brothers, but in the wider sense I think he's popular because no one really hated him. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3082238 Share on other sites More sharing options...
b1soul Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 I'm not buying that Sanguinius is more popular than Russ among the fans :tu: Also, I believe 40K fiction is full of fan-service...Sang deserves his fair share of love :D Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/253842-primarch-interactions/#findComment-3082638 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.