Primarch Interactions

[Heru2012]

Horus was the best, hands down. People saying you cannot be the best and fall....:)...the man was stabbed by a daemon blade, poisoned nearly to death, had his soul dragged through the warp slowly corrupting him with visions...the fact he resisted at all shows how great he was! Bearing in mind at that time, probably only a few of the primarchs like Magnus actually knew what the warp "is". Even the Primarchs promoted the Imperial Truth and when the Sons of Horus first encountered a daemon no one knew what it was.

 

I think it just shows, if the Emperor would have been straight up with the Primarchs about the nature of the warp, and had it on a need to know, so the foot troops were still unaware, Horus would've been able to protect and steel himself against the whispers of the gods.

 

To be fair, in the first book he was really likeable, which was horrible because you know where the story is heading. The way he talks to his marines like they're his own children, he's approachable and patrician. The first thing that I pictured when I read about Horus way back when the first book was released was "golly this guy is like "Buddy Christ"!

 

His fall from grace was no fault of his own, it was the Emperors belief that by not telling the primarchs about chaos, they wouldn't think about it. But it's like drugs, you talk to kids about them because if you outright ban them, the rebellion happens, they're ill informed when they get to them, and someone ends up on a slab in hospital. The primarchs basically did this with the drug of "Chaos".

[Arkangilos]

Horus was the best, hands down. People saying you cannot be the best and fall....:)...the man was stabbed by a daemon blade, poisoned nearly to death, had his soul dragged through the warp slowly corrupting him with visions...the fact he resisted at all shows how great he was! Bearing in mind at that time, probably only a few of the primarchs like Magnus actually knew what the warp "is". Even the Primarchs promoted the Imperial Truth and when the Sons of Horus first encountered a daemon no one knew what it was.

 

I think it just shows, if the Emperor would have been straight up with the Primarchs about the nature of the warp, and had it on a need to know, so the foot troops were still unaware, Horus would've been able to protect and steel himself against the whispers of the gods.

 

To be fair, in the first book he was really likeable, which was horrible because you know where the story is heading. The way he talks to his marines like they're his own children, he's approachable and patrician. The first thing that I pictured when I read about Horus way back when the first book was released was "golly this guy is like "Buddy Christ"!

 

His fall from grace was no fault of his own, it was the Emperors belief that by not telling the primarchs about chaos, they wouldn't think about it. But it's like drugs, you talk to kids about them because if you outright ban them, the rebellion happens, they're ill informed when they get to them, and someone ends up on a slab in hospital. The primarchs basically did this with the drug of "Chaos".

 

Horus did know about Chaos. The Emperor told him, and in the first book he explains that. The Emperor told him what they were scientifically.

 

 

Yes, Horus was the best, but we aren't getting into this. This is about how primarchs interacted with each other and with Sanguinius.

 

 

And his fall from grace was his own, he still, in the end, chose that decision. It was clear as day in the books. The gods lied to him, and he believed them over the Emperor.

[Heru2012]

Horus did know about Chaos. The Emperor told him, and in the first book he explains that. The Emperor told him what they were scientifically.

 

 

Yes, Horus was the best, but we aren't getting into this. This is about how primarchs interacted with each other and with Sanguinius.

 

 

And his fall from grace was his own, he still, in the end, chose that decision. It was clear as day in the books. The gods lied to him, and he believed them over the Emperor.

 

Just because the Emperor explains it scientifically it doesn't mean he's prepared for an actual encounter. Explain a rainbow to someone then let them see one for the first time. As for interractions with Sanguinius, I think most of the primarchs would have liked him, he was a popular guy, the problem with that is that the primarchs are godly humans, and with that god sized human flaws. Too much adoration causes bitterness and resentment from people who consider themselves to be "just as interesting" as the winged freak.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

...Horus would've been able to protect and steel himself against the whispers of the gods.

 

The Sin of Pride.

[Arkangilos]

Horus did know about Chaos. The Emperor told him, and in the first book he explains that. The Emperor told him what they were scientifically.

 

 

Yes, Horus was the best, but we aren't getting into this. This is about how primarchs interacted with each other and with Sanguinius.

 

 

And his fall from grace was his own, he still, in the end, chose that decision. It was clear as day in the books. The gods lied to him, and he believed them over the Emperor.

 

Just because the Emperor explains it scientifically it doesn't mean he's prepared for an actual encounter. Explain a rainbow to someone then let them see one for the first time. As for interractions with Sanguinius, I think most of the primarchs would have liked him, he was a popular guy, the problem with that is that the primarchs are godly humans, and with that god sized human flaws. Too much adoration causes bitterness and resentment from people who consider themselves to be "just as interesting" as the winged freak.

 

 

I have no doubt that the Emperor did tell him that they would try to tempt them with the rest of humanity.

 

With your rainbow comment, even if I were to explain it religiously they wouldn't get it anymore than scientifically.

 

Without actually experiences a taste of it, even if you are aware of it, you wont be prepared for it. That was beyond the Emperor's control either way.

And he still made the choice knowing they were hostile towards humans. The first book even makes it very clear he knew what he was doing.

[A D-B]

I'm not buying that Sanguinius is more popular than Russ among the fans :)

Also, I believe 40K fiction is full of fan-service...Sang deserves his fair share of love :P

 

Naw, you misunderstand. I'm not saying he shouldn't be shown in all his glory. To suggest otherwise would be pointless and silly. But that's not the point. A faction should never be shown as weak, or worse than it is, to make another faction look better. You'll always, always get people who say that it happens even when it doesn't, because some readers are unable to tell the difference between "This faction didn't win, so the book is worthless" and "This faction lost, but it was fair that they lost in those circumstances." Add that to the chaos of how everyone sees the setting in a different light, and you'll always have conflict. But, there are some hard and fast rules that no one can argue with. Such as Horus as First Primarch, the narrative echo of Lucifer, and the best and brightest of the Emperor's sons.

 

One faction should never be shown as better than others, just to secure favourable opinions from a popular faction's many fans. I'm not saying anything has happened to that degree yet, but it applies across the board. The other archangels were impressive, powerful figures. But the tragedy of the War in Heaven is that Lucifer - the Morningstar, the best and the brightest, was the one to fall. Not Michael. Not Gabriel. Not Raphael. Lucifer. A book that shows one of them as better or somehow more perfect than Lucifer would either be diverging from the storyline to be original (and therefore have nothing to do with the mythology itself) or would be simply diluting the entire theme.

 

The same thing applies. The Heresy was a tragedy because Horus fell. Not Sanguinius. Not Guilliman. Not the Lion.

[b1soul]

Such as Horus as First Primarch, the narrative echo of Lucifer, and the best and brightest of the Emperor's sons.

By best and brightest do you mean "all around the best" or "best choice for Warmaster"? The former seems to imply that he's superior to the other primarchs in all aspects.

 

But the tragedy of the War in Heaven is that Lucifer - the Morningstar, the best and the brightest, was the one to fall. Not Michael.

Would you say Sanguinius is roughly analogous to the Archangel Michael? That's how I've always felt.

 

Admittedly, Michael casts Lucifer out of heaven, whereas in the grimdarkness of 40K, Horus rips Sang a new one.

[A D-B]

Such as Horus as First Primarch, the narrative echo of Lucifer, and the best and brightest of the Emperor's sons.

By best and brightest do you mean "all around the best" or "best choice for Warmaster"? The former seems to imply that he's superior to the other primarchs in all aspects.

 

I tend to despise the many millions of "Primarch X is better than Primarch Y" contests that happen across 40K forums, especially when they go into specifics like comparing leadership qualities or melee skill, etc. It's just not how I see the mythic aspects of the license.

 

That said, the one thing that's clearly known throughout the lore is the Horus was the First Primarch, the one noted above all others for being the best at motivating his brothers, using their skills to the maximum, and having the best Legion - among many other such comments. He was the Emperor's heir. He was the one chosen as Warmaster, and considered the best of the best. I don't mean anything else beyond what's always published about him, because that's what's always been stated about him everywhere. It's his entire deal, and it's why the Heresy was a tragedy, as well as the obvious thematic mirror to the War on Heaven. I don't care how he racks up in terms of individual traits, the same way I don't care if Achilles would've beaten Hector if it'd been raining, or if Morpheus would've beaten Lucifer if the Devil hadn't had a change of heart. Thematically, narratively, and historically by the lore, Horus was - and I quote - "the greatest Primarch". Different writers and readers will take that how they choose, which is very much the point - but I think it's something that needs restating a little more often in the series, especially in terms of future books.

[Aegnor]

Yep, there's a difference between a Horus believing he has failed and is dying saying someone else would've done better, and that being true. Horus was the greatest, and he was the one in that circumstance. Without glossing over the differences between Horus and other Primarchs like Guilliman or Sanguinius, the Chaos Gods didn't make them the focus of their scheme the way they did with Horus. That might have been partly because they felt there was an opportunity with Horus that wasn't there with some of the others. But it was also definitely because they were inferior tools for Chaos' purpose compared to the greatest of the Primarchs.

[b1soul]

Different writers and readers will take that how they choose, which is very much the point - but I think it's something that needs restating a little more often in the series, especially in terms of future books.

"Greatest primarch" seems sufficiently broad

However, I don't believe the concept that Horus outshines the other primarchs to the extent Lucifer outshines the other angels has been very effectively conveyed in the series

[Antarius]

The way I see it, all the Primarchs are "the best" in their own right. Each of them has their strength and weaknesses but they are all, essentially, great at pretty much everything. Even comparing them with each other I don't think it makes much sense to say some of them are weak/stupid/uncharismatic etc.

 

Horus though, was the best of the best, second only to the Emperor (and maybe not even him). His fall was his one and only failing (and really, do we know if he was wrong to turn on the Emperor?). I think my only real complaint with the HH series is that it falls a bit short in conveying Horus' fall. No wonder, as it's quite a tall order but I think the books make it seems like he falls just a little too easily.

 

Overall, I think you need a little bit of double-think to process this one correctly: on one hand, Horus was the greatest of all the Primarchs, on the other hand the Primarchs who stayed loyal in spite of temptation and the odds are even greater in their own right. None of these "facts" diminish the other.

[b1soul]

Horus though, was the best of the best, second only to the Emperor (and maybe not even him).

He was the "greatest"

...but I don't think he was better than Lorgar at spreading religious zeal, better than Guilliman at planning and organising, better than Fulgrim at being a twink, better than Khan at lightning fast warfare, better than Angron at close combat, better than Corax at being stealthy, better than Curze at manipulating fear, better than Alpharius at secret plotting, better than Magnus at psykery, better than Dorn at fortification, better at Perturabo at besieging etc.

[Arkangilos]

Hey A D-B, since you write the Word Bearers, how do you think Lorgar thinks of Sanguinius. We know he thinks negatively of Guilliman, but is he cool with Sanguinius? What about the other primarchs? What does Lorgar think about them?