Sanguinius was the best Primarch, he just was!

[Chairman_woo]

So I had a semi-arguement last night about this. I made the rather bold claim that sanguinius was clearly the best primarch and understandibly my friend attempted to disagree however I think my arguement brought him round to a large extent and I thought I'd share

.

 

If all the primarchs had been asked to vote for who gets the title of warmaster they'd pick Sanguinius every time. He seems to be the brother the other primarchs regarded as the wize even tempered one, and even Horus himself more or less says he thought Sanguinius should have been warmaster in his stead.

 

If sanguinius has been in Horus's place he would have simply refused the deamonic pact and allowed the plague sword to kill him, thus potentially saving the galaxy from the herresy in the 1st place. (at the very least a massive massive setback)

 

Sanguinius was the only primarch as far as I know that had no significant negative rivalries with his brothers, they all liked and respected him (even angron is a healthy competition rather than an outright grudgematch).

 

You almost get the impression that everytime he left a room, everyone in it inc. many of his brothers would whisper "what a guy" under their breath.

 

Sanguinius was the only Primarch who truly understood the emperors vision & plans due to his unique prescient mind. Unlike Magnus who dispite being a vastly more powerfull psyker achieved his divinations via sorcery, thus ultimately leaving him blind to the two most significant truths. i.e. what the emperor had planned for the future of mankind (golden throne etc.) and equally significantly that the collosal anchient inteligences in the warp (gods) cannot ever be trusted by men (and into the bargain why knowlage of such things is so closely guarded). Many people think this makes the emperor a fool or simply a bad father for not explaining this to Magnus, but I feel that he honestly didn't think he should have to, hence his heart wrenching dissopointment upon seeing Magnus emerge from and destroy the golden throne/webway, he had failed to learn the same hard lessons about using the warp the emperor had expected him to discover for himself untill it was too late. Sanguinius would never have done this should he have found himself in a position to do so, he would just understand on a fundamental level why it would have been a mistake not because he was a master of the power of the immaterium and its untold secrets, but because on some fundamental level he shared a portion of the emperors wizdom in which he clearly trusted completely. I think on some instictual level Sanguinius understood something of what the emperor had learned of the great anchient minds and their investment in the fate of mankind, and as such when confronted by them he almost instantly recognised the imperitave need to refuse anything they might have to say or offer for the sake of the future of the entire human race! I'm not saying he was necessarily consciously aware of their existence etc. but rather that much like he instantly recognised the emperor for what he was virtually the moment he arrived on Baal, he recognised the malevolent minds of the chaos gods and their emmisaries in the same fashion.

 

If Sanguinius had been anywhere near Istavan 4 and or 5 he would have seen it comming and taken steps!

 

He thoroughly kicked Ka'Banna's ass (one of the most powerfull bloodthirsters known to exist) in style infront of basically all the marine legions (loyal and trator).

 

He walked into the fight with Horus knowing he would die, and doing so anyway knowing also that if he did not the emperor would be defeated.

 

He was the best looking and had freaking angel wings!

 

And most of all dispite his almost contant calm and level headedness, wizdom, knowlage, compassion, prescience and just generally being an awesome guy he was the equal (or perhaps sometimes better) of any of his brothers in an angry punchup and could harness and unleash a maniacal fury that made even the world eaters bow their heads in mutual respect.

 

 

Not trying to ouright diss the other Primarchs, but Sanguinius was the dude! While they all had flaws Sanguinius appears to the only one that turned his into an outright boon, this savage rage forced him to develop mindbending levels of self controll and IMHO is alongside his prescience the main reason he ended up so wize and even tempered. He mastered himself and his flaws at a very early stage because he had to, wheras his brothers in their own little ways all seemed to be subtly directed and compromised by them, with this leading to most of their undooings.

 

Gulliman was even tempered but too officious/pragmatic, perfect for the aftermath of the herresy but not so much for leading mankind to ultimate glory?

Dorn had a massive ego/temper problem, which ultimately got him killed.

Vulkan & Ferrus Mannus had their own tech based obsessions/distractions.

Leaman russ was/is basically just a unreasonable fighting obsessed beer swilling arsehole.

Lionel was/is a brooding emo kid often too concerned with his legions own affairs, glory and rivalries.

Corrax seemed like a reasonable chap but again lacked that spark of greatness (and certainly didn't see the collosal asskicking comming his way).

& the trators flaws speak for themselves I feel...

 

Sanguinius is the only one I would completely trust to make the wize choice every time and as I have already stated he appears to the the only one that implicity understood what the emperor was all about (right from day 1 no less). His brothers were supermen all of them, geniuses to the last and every one of them on their own would have been peerless leaders of men, but each had a corruption, something about which their rationality/resolve was compromised. Most found outlets and ways to harness and controll these flaws but none moreso than Sanguinius IMHO.

 

I know I'm always going to get a biased oppinion on this forum but what do people think? Am I not giving gulliman and Vulkan their dues? They seem like the closest contenders at the very least...

[DominicJ]

Rather less well argued, staff member and me on tuesday.

 

Staff: "The Ultramarines conquered more worlds than any other legion"

Me: "Yeah, its easy when you just side step the entire horus heresy fighting and declare yourself winner at the end."

Staff: "Where did you pick that up"

Me: "Assaulting Horus' Battle Barge"

Staff: **look of pained resignation**

[A D-B]

Nope.

 

What you're essentially doing here is saying Michael is "better" than Lucifer. Well, Lucifer was the brightest star, the most powerful, and the First Angel, if you will. The myth of the War in Heaven is a tragedy because Lucifer fell, not Michael or Uriel or anyone else. The best and brightest turned against God.

 

The Heresy is exactly the same narrative.

 

Now, admittedly, the series hasn't done a great job recently in showing Horus as the main man, and for obvious reasons Sanguinius will always be the most popular primarch with the fan base. It's not a disservice to Sanguinius to say that Horus is more competent; the background has always placed Horus before his brothers, as first among equals. In the greater scheme of things, Horus is the most competent and "best" primarch. That's the very reason it's a tragedy.

 

This came up recently (and I've no doubt will be coming up tenfold in the coming months...) but I've lost the links to the larger discussions where it took place in 2 or 3 other threads.

[Darklighter]

I've always thought that Horus was picked as War-master over Sanguinius because in times of war to much compassion can stop a man/primarch from making the tough calls needed to achieve a quick resolution.

[Legatus]

Sanguinius was an awesome Primarch, and probably liked by all of his brothers. I do think that even the cynical and "damaged" Primarchs were probably able to appreciate the good in him, and not just take it as arrogance or vanity. I even think it would be a nice touch if immediately after the Heresy, before turning completely insane, one of the traitor Primarchs maybe expressed regret that Sanguinius had to die.

 

However, being Warmaster was not just about being liked, it's also about doing a great job. Sanguinius certainly did a good job during the Great Crusade, but he did not distinguish himself as a commander like some of the other Primarchs did. There are several Primrchs whose achievements during the Great Crusade are specifically ponted out in their back story. Sanguinius is generally not among them, and his performance is barely mentioned.

[A D-B]

There are several Primrchs whose achievements during the Great Crusade are specifically ponted out in their back story. Sanguinius is generally not among them, and his performance is barely mentioned.

 

Also, kinda intriguingly, the Sons of Horus in 30K and the Blood Angels of 40K have slightly similar preferred tactics. The Blood Angels are more jump-packy these days, but back then the Sons of Horus were very much the best at rapid deployment assaults, drop pod attacks, and the "speartip" tactic. It's mentioned a bunch (as I know you fully know, Legatus) but I find the overlap sorta interesting. Horus was always noted as having other Legions do the clean-up work, or to get to grips with the enemy force while his Legion drop-podded in to sever the enemy's head, so to speak.

 

Again, it's not about disrespecting the Blood Angels. It's about countering their insane levels of fangasm when they reach unrealistic proportions, reminding that all things are in balance, and that ultimately it was Horus and the Luna Wolves/Sons of Horus that were considered to be the very pinnacle of primarch competence and Legion badassery. They were the best, which is why their betrayal was the biggest tragedy possible.

[Chairman_woo]

Nope.

 

What you're essentially doing here is saying Michael is "better" than Lucifer. Well, Lucifer was the brightest star, the most powerful, and the First Angel, if you will. The myth of the War in Heaven is a tragedy because Lucifer fell, not Michael or Uriel or anyone else. The best and brightest turned against God.

 

The Heresy is exactly the same narrative.

 

Now, admittedly, the series hasn't done a great job recently in showing Horus as the main man, and for obvious reasons Sanguinius will always be the most popular primarch with the fan base. It's not a disservice to Sanguinius to say that Horus is more competent; the background has always placed Horus before his brothers, as first among equals. In the greater scheme of things, Horus is the most competent and "best" primarch. That's the very reason it's a tragedy.

 

This came up recently (and I've no doubt will be coming up tenfold in the coming months...) but I've lost the links to the larger discussions where it took place in 2 or 3 other threads.

 

Thats a rather wonderfull way of thinking about it actually :yes:

 

I guess my counter would be that Horus (Luicifer) donmonstrates a critical flaw that Sanguinius (Michael) does not by the simple act of allowing himself to fall. Whilst he was backed into a corner so some extent Horus's descicion was his own, he had to give himself willingly and he did, Something sanguinius would not have done posessing an inherited portion of the emperor's (gods) wizdom Horus did not.

 

This actually compromises me a little as the Judeo-christian-muslim mythology inclines me to side with lucifer and the "fallen" over the tetragrammaton (YWEH), but I have always tried to take 40k fluff as its own thing regardless of how much inspiration/symbology it steals from elsewhere, as there are almost always so many other inspirations mixed in that one could no longer consider the fluff directly based on anything specific. To only focus on one particular mythology (war in heaven) is to disregard the many other religious myths at work here (norse, celt, hindu, egyuptian etc.). The parallels you describe are very much there to be made but I'm wary of reading too much into conclusions based off it in isolation when other such mythological frameworks are also clearly factors (as is the original work of the authors).

My own conception of teh Emprah & his struggle is based more on Nietzsche's ubermench in the context of Hegel and Gothe's dialetic cosmos. Simply put I regard the emperor as the formost manifestation of humanitys acendancy to godhood, pure potential consciousness moving inorexably towards a state of pure actualisation, or if you prefer quantity transforming itself via the proscess of the dialetic to quality. In this context the chaos gods take the role of the demiurge, that creature which created this physical realm and shaped much of the life within it, but which arogantly considers itself the true and only "God(s)" and demands the fielty and worship of its mortal creations. They fear nothing in this universe more than such creatures realising their inherent potential and userping them, and so Teh Emprah represents something the Gnostics called Abraxas, the first soul to reach complete gnosis and truly understand what these malevolant creatures really are and how/why mankind must transcend them if it is ever to realize the potential all conscious mortal creatures posess, and put an end to the eternal strife that will persist untill such a time as this occurs. In this context atleast Sanguinius demonstrates an understanding of the nature of lifes inherent struggle that is sorely lacking in Horus or indeed anyone other than Teh Emprah himself (maybe malcador also).

 

Horus's flaw was his innocence, something Sanguinius lost at a very early age due to his unique mind. The fall of Horus was undoubtedly the greatest tragedy, and truly unbelevable to those close to him, but his noble winged brother I do not feel would have ever fallen thusly...

[A D-B]

Horus's flaw was his innocence, something Sanguinius lost at a very early age due to his unique mind. The fall of Horus was undoubtedly the greatest tragedy, and truly unbelevable to those close to him, but his noble winged brother I do not feel would have ever fallen thusly...

 

You can say that same strength applies to all the primarchs that didn't turn. That doesn't make Sanguinius special, then. It makes him one of many that refused it outright.

 

Sanguinius isn't "better". No one is "better". If you attribute "betterness" purely to not turning to Chaos, then Sanguinius is indeed one of many that shows that "betterness". He lacks in other areas, though. All things in balance. They were all equals with strengths in different areas - with one exception to prove the rule. The only primarch that stood out of the pack in terms of overall "betterness" was Horus. That's why he was chosen as Warmaster, and why his fall is a narrative tragedy.

[Marshal Rohr]

Dorn did not have an enormous ego or rage problems. There is a difference in Angron being wrathful and Dorn swearing vengeance for the death of his father. It really invalidates anything you try to say when

 

Gulliman was even tempered but too officious/pragmatic, perfect for the aftermath of the herresy but not so much for leading mankind to ultimate glory?

Dorn had a massive ego/temper problem, which ultimately got him killed.

Vulkan & Ferrus Mannus had their own tech based obsessions/distractions.

Leaman russ was/is basically just a unreasonable fighting obsessed beer swilling arsehole.

Lionel was/is a brooding emo kid often too concerned with his legions own affairs, glory and rivalries.

Corrax seemed like a reasonable chap but again lacked that spark of greatness (and certainly didn't see the collosal asskicking comming his way).

 

Is your most reasoned and well thought out argument about the merits of the Primarchs.

[Chairman_woo]

^ There is a clear counter position to what I just suggested mind, that Teh Emprah is infact the one who is mistaken, and has failed to recognise the natural propper order of things, and moreover arogantly belives he can take his place alongside our elemental gods or defeat them. Life is an endless and perfect cycle of creation and destruction, life & death, tzeench & nurgle playing out their great cosmic play of change/growth and entropy/decay. The designs of mortals mean nothing in the context of this great game and only a fool when faced with this basic truth of existence would not simply play his part in the great game resigned to his/her only possible place in the cosmos.

 

In this context it is Horus not Sanguinius that posseses the true insight, and commes to recognise his father for what he is, an arrogant fool who at best has put his own acendancy above his species or at worst has utterly failed to understand the true nature and purpose of life itself....

 

As you may have guessed I'm with the emperor on this one, but ultimately we could never know for sure without shairing one mind with the gods to truly understand things as they do...

[Chairman_woo]

Dorn did not have an enormous ego or rage problems. There is a difference in Angron being wrathful and Dorn swearing vengeance for the death of his father. It really invalidates anything you try to say when

 

Gulliman was even tempered but too officious/pragmatic, perfect for the aftermath of the herresy but not so much for leading mankind to ultimate glory?

Dorn had a massive ego/temper problem, which ultimately got him killed.

Vulkan & Ferrus Mannus had their own tech based obsessions/distractions.

Leaman russ was/is basically just a unreasonable fighting obsessed beer swilling arsehole.

Lionel was/is a brooding emo kid often too concerned with his legions own affairs, glory and rivalries.

Corrax seemed like a reasonable chap but again lacked that spark of greatness (and certainly didn't see the collosal asskicking comming his way).

 

Is your most reasoned and well thought out argument about the merits of the Primarchs.

 

Right so through no ones fault but my own the absurdity with which I regard the concept of "best" appears to have been lost. Naturally its an analytical absurdity to refer to something as "best" without a finate and comprehensive set of criterion of which there none of any riggour are to be be found here. There is an inherent sense of humor at the absurdity of that implicit here but I at no point attempted to clearly declare or define this beyond the title of the thread and as such I appologise unreservedly. I mean "best" in a purely anecdotal way, and as I suspect my posts have suggested it is largley in context to the undisputed awesomeness of teh emprah himself. i.e. who would come closest to being able to do teh emprah's job I suppose. I am in complete agreement that Horus appears to be the main competition there anyway...

 

Dorn on more than one occasion flew off the handle because someone said something he did not want to hear, virtually killing Garro etc. on the spot for suggesting Horus had turned springs to mind. An understandible reaction mind given someone is accusing one of his closest brothers of something unthinkable but dont you think Sanguinius would simply have heard Garro out and kept any knee jerk emotional response under controll untill he knew the truth? If there were to be a who can keep their cool competition between them, I reckon Sanguinius would win hands down.

 

The list I wrote was unecessarily brief and generalised I know sorry, I like to keep things relatively light hearted and perhaps went too far there. But What I was trying to say was that I can think of scenario's where all (or atleast most) of the others would/did find themselves emotionaly compomised, or in some way acting in a way that was not fully considered and unbiased. Sanguinius gives the distinct impression that he was virtually unflappable, and those times he did flap were only because he expressly allowed himself to do so, and even then because he had reasoned this was an objectively good idea. They all possesed this ability in some way, as I said they are all peerless supermen beyond almost anything comparable but each had their quirks, and even those who could perhaps match Sanguinius's wizdom and restraint like Gulliman & Vulkan lacked that prescient spark of understanding. They all understood that they must play their parts, but Sanguinius perhaps understood why in a way no other did.

[Legatus]

There are several Primrchs whose achievements during the Great Crusade are specifically ponted out in their back story. Sanguinius is generally not among them, and his performance is barely mentioned.

Also, kinda intriguingly, the Sons of Horus in 30K and the Blood Angels of 40K have slightly similar preferred tactics. The Blood Angels are more jump-packy these days, but back then the Sons of Horus were very much the best at rapid deployment assaults, drop pod attacks, and the "speartip" tactic. It's mentioned a bunch (as I know you fully know, Legatus) but I find the overlap sorta interesting. Horus was always noted as having other Legions do the clean-up work, or to get to grips with the enemy force while his Legion drop-podded in to sever the enemy's head, so to speak.

I have to admitt I am not that firm on the descriptions of the Legions given in the Collected Visions and Horus Heresy series material. I still have not read most of that, and only really try to catch up on particular details and passages if they come up in a discussion.

 

In the Index Astartes series, the Luna Wolves were more described as general purpose forces, without any preferred maneuver. They were described as preferring to eliminate the enemy command with a swift strike, but without naming a particular method to do so. A drop pod assault is of course often the way to do that, but it is not necessarily the only way. The Raven Guard, on the other hand, were experts in rapid deployment of units via thunderhawks or drop pods.

 

So, while the Raven Guard would employ drop pod and thunderhawk assault against command positions as well as against other enemy position, since they focus on the tactical method, not necessarily on a specific target, the Luna Wolves instead mainly prioritised command positions as their targets, and attempted to strike at them with what ever method most suitable. In a lot of situations that might have been a drop pod assault, but if already planetside it may well have been an armoured spear tip or infiltrating Veterans, or just armoured companies breaking through the enemy lines to get to the command bunkers.

 

Of course, not only would the Luna Wolves often employ drop pod assaults to assault their target, the Raven Guard would often employ their assaults to target the enemy command position as well, since that is just an obcious objective. So often their employed approaches will seem very similar. But for the Luna Wolves it was the prioritising of targets, while for the Raven Guard it was expertise in the specific tactical approach.

 

 

(I used the Raven Guard as a comparison. Technically their doctrine was about rapid/unseen deployment in general, not necessarily about drop pod deployment. Perhaps the Blood Angels can get the even more specific "drop pod assault" niche, while the Raven Guard also employ a lot of scouts and other transports to ensure effective redeployment of forces. The Raven Guard are more about "Rapid Response", while with the Blood Angels it is more "Schock Attack". The Luna Wolves, in turn, have a "Vital Strike" doctrine.)

[Chairman_woo]

You guys are winning me over alot with the Luna Wolves were the most ballanced legion thing, along with Horus being about as well rounded a character as you could hope for I do understand why Horus was chosen tho for the reccord I think Sanguinius would have been less contentious as it sidesteps some of the friction that came with the whole favored son thing. It all made sense at the time, but I'm thinking maybe the imperium would have a very different future if it had been Sanguinius who was warmaster given it's implied that Sanguinius was a close 2nd (Horus did seem to think so at any rate).

 

Whether Sanguinius's compassion might have been a limitation (i.e. out of proportion) is debatable but I completely see where your comming from Darklighter :P

[Darrell]

I always thought Jaghatai Khan was the man, based primarily on the Primarch being nearly copy-pasted from history books into the 30th millenium. Other Primarchs, and their accomplishments, have a lot of creative license added to make them suitably grimdark.

 

But, Jaghatai? Murdering tribes to the last man, woman and child? Burning cities to the ground and not leaving a single living thing behind? Conquering his known world? Forging an empire from barbaric nomads? Demanding a leader's head on a pike, because if it doesn't happen you're going to do to their cities what you did to their neighbors, and actually getting it? All that stuff happened in our history, by a regular mortal. Sure, they changed the history a bit but not as liberally as the other Primarchs.

 

Sanguinius did cool, awesome stuff in an imaginary future created in the minds of talented writers. Genghis Khan did awesome, cool stuff in our world's actual history with his own blood and sweat. You can't beat that kind of awesome, from my perspective.

[Chairman_woo]

I always thought Jaghatai Khan was the man, based primarily on the Primarch being nearly copy-pasted from history books into the 30th millenium. Other Primarchs, and their accomplishments, have a lot of creative license added to make them suitably grimdark.

 

But, Jaghatai? Murdering tribes to the last man, woman and child? Burning cities to the ground and not leaving a single living thing behind? Conquering his known world? Forging an empire from barbaric nomads? Demanding a leader's head on a pike, because if it doesn't happen you're going to do to their cities what you did to their neighbors, and actually getting it? All that stuff happened in our history, by a regular mortal. Sure, they changed the history a bit but not as liberally as the other Primarchs.

 

Sanguinius did cool, awesome stuff in an imaginary future created in the minds of talented writers. Genghis Khan did awesome, cool stuff in our world's actual history with his own blood and sweat. You can't beat that kind of awesome, from my perspective.

 

True but then the British empire is generally regarded as the largest ever in terms of area of land and numbers of people controlled (the Mongols came 2nd there), the lesson being you can create a massive empire with ruthless terror tactics and suggestible babarians but if you want the biggest you can simply make a collosal twofaced busness out of it and simply bribe & corrupt your way into your subjects oppressing themselves and your enemies fighting amongst each other. Alpharius (and maybe Lionel) spring to mind there.

 

I like your idea tho, there are few ambiguities or complexities with Jaghatai, he's just a raging Mongol mastermind :lol:

[Plague Angel]

I am pretty sure this is a question that cannot be answered objectively, guys.

[Darklighter]

I always thought Jaghatai Khan was the man, based primarily on the Primarch being nearly copy-pasted from history books into the 30th millenium. Other Primarchs, and their accomplishments, have a lot of creative license added to make them suitably grimdark.

 

But, Jaghatai? Murdering tribes to the last man, woman and child? Burning cities to the ground and not leaving a single living thing behind? Conquering his known world? Forging an empire from barbaric nomads? Demanding a leader's head on a pike, because if it doesn't happen you're going to do to their cities what you did to their neighbors, and actually getting it? All that stuff happened in our history, by a regular mortal. Sure, they changed the history a bit but not as liberally as the other Primarchs.

 

Sanguinius did cool, awesome stuff in an imaginary future created in the minds of talented writers. Genghis Khan did awesome, cool stuff in our world's actual history with his own blood and sweat. You can't beat that kind of awesome, from my perspective.

 

I bet you wouldn't call Genghis Khan (in his prime) a regular mortal to his face! :yes:

 

I think Plague Angel is correct I don't think there is away to stay objective enough to sort out this debat.

 

That said SANGUINIUS RULES!!!!!

[A D-B]

I am pretty sure this is a question that cannot be answered objectively, guys.

 

Most primarch debates can't, no. And I loathe them when they take place. But, luckily, this one can be answered objectively, with background lore to back it up. Horus is the "greatest primarch", both in a narrative context, and in the established background. It's very much The Point. It's why he was Warmaster, and it's why the Horus Heresy is a tragedy. The brightest star was the one to fall. That's not subjective, nor is it an opinion.

 

"Not turning to Chaos" isn't the only criteria for greatness, competency, skill or leadership. It's just one of many aspects to consider. But ultimately, Horus is First primarch, and the entire point is that he's the best of the best, the first among equals.

 

The mistake would be to think this in any way disrespects Sanguinius. It doesn't. The only aspect of subjectivity is that a lot of Blood Angel fans are coloured by their bias in this, just like faction fans are always coloured by bias. Again, that's something I understand but don't see why it keeps happening. I collect Word Bearers. I don't think they're "better" than anyone else. I like them for their delusions and flaws as much as what they're the most successful at. They're not my favourite Legion. Just one of many that I love. Even if I did think they were "the best", I wouldn't insist Lorgar was better than any other primarch. Same way as if I collected World Eaters or Blood Angels or Raven Guard.

[brent in Korea]

If anyone wants to add their favorite BA fluff, they can do it at http://onlybloodangels.blogspot.kr/2012/07...gels-fluff.html

[Chairman_woo]

I bet you wouldn't call Genghis Khan (in his prime) a regular mortal to his face! :P

 

I think Plague Angel is correct I don't think there is away to stay objective enough to sort out this debat.

 

That said SANGUINIUS RULES!!!!!

 

I'm glad someone picked up the tone of the original post ;) . Serves me right tho for assuming an absurd title like "Sanguinius is bestest cause he is" together with an almost completely hyperbolic arguement, on a bloodangel forum no less, wouldn't be taken too seriously ;) .

 

That said A D-B makes some interesting well thought out points I've enjoyed reading, and if we were having an objective who was truly "first amongst equals" debate I might be conceding right now (And in that respect I am graciously), however I'm not really having that debate so much as espousing the many many ways in which to paraphrase Darklighter SANGUINIUS FREAKING RULES!!!!!

 

Is that a cop out? Yes it bloody well is! But I wouldn't have phrased things anything like I did previously if this was anywhere other then the Bloodangel subforum and I'm not about to start taking it entirely seriously now! :P

[Grey Knight Purifier]

As a loyal son of Dorn, I have to pop in and say that Dorn did not die due to his temper. He died blunting the main force of a Black Crusade, aimed at a weakened Imperium. If Dorn hadn't stepped in, Abbaddon would have gotten alot further, and caused alot more damage.

[Plague Angel]

The only aspect of subjectivity is that a lot of Blood Angel fans are coloured by their bias in this, just like faction fans are always coloured by bias. Again, that's something I understand but don't see why it keeps happening. I collect Word Bearers. I don't think they're "better" than anyone else. I like them for their delusions and flaws as much as what they're the most successful at. They're not my favourite Legion. Just one of many that I love. Even if I did think they were "the best", I wouldn't insist Lorgar was better than any other primarch. Same way as if I collected World Eaters or Blood Angels or Raven Guard.

 

You mean you don't understand it as a general principle, or are Blood Angels fans somehow special in this regard?

 

It's interesting that collections and favorites don't always match though, and also interesting to me that Primarch and legion are so (rightfully) equated, most of the time.

 

I've only ever collected and played Blood Angels, though my favorite legion has gone from Alpha Legion to Blood Angels to (thanks to you) Night Lords. I've also taken an interest in Raven Guard lately, thanks to Death Watch. Meanwhile, though, my favorite primarch has gone from Mortarion to Dorn to Sanguinius to Lorgar (again thanks to you). Curiously, my favorite primarchs and legions have never matched, not even BA and Sanguinius.

 

"Favorite" kind of means who I'm excited about at the time, though. I wasn't a huge fan of Sanguinius before I became a BA player, but as I worked with the codex more and more, the fluff started to take hold of my brain. BA and Sanguinius are always consistent in my heart though, never fully gone even when other Legions are getting attention. (It made Soul Hunter a challenging read, I tell you that.)

 

The way I see it, you always root for your team, but when the championship cup comes and your team didn't make it through the playoffs, you're still going to pick a side to cheer in the big game.

[Thargrim_Bloodwolf]

Gulliman was even tempered but too officious/pragmatic, perfect for the aftermath of the herresy but not so much for leading mankind to ultimate glory?

Dorn had a massive ego/temper problem, which ultimately got him killed.

Vulkan & Ferrus Mannus had their own tech based obsessions/distractions.

Leaman russ was/is basically just a unreasonable fighting obsessed beer swilling arsehole.

Lionel was/is a brooding emo kid often too concerned with his legions own affairs, glory and rivalries.

Corrax seemed like a reasonable chap but again lacked that spark of greatness (and certainly didn't see the collosal asskicking comming his way).

& the trators flaws speak for themselves I feel...

 

This generalisation on the other primarchs is, I feel, misguided and ill informed. The fact is that while many seemed like this to the general imperium, their true personalities were different. Russ is probably the best example from the list, while he did enjoy alcohol and fighting he wasn't really an arsehole. The fact is he was created with the purpose of being the Emperor's executioner (as seen on Prospero) meant that he needed to be obsessed with fighting to do his set role.

However, from your statement about Russ you portray him as a bit of an uncontrolled fool which is also wrong since the Wolves needed the most control to fight with the savagery they do.

 

Your statement about the Lion as well is largely wrong as although he was brooding and serious he was also a tactical genius which in many ways does make up for his other failings.

[Murcielago]

SOOOOOOO...After this is all said and done, maybe we can just rephrase the topic and say that OUT OF THE LOYALIST PRIMARCHS...SANGUINIUS FREAKING RULES!!

[RapatoR]

Well Horus was picked twice over other primarchs: He was chosen as Warmaster and also as champion of the gods. He was chosen by the Emperor, you can hardly doubt or argue against decision of Emperor. He knew who of primarchs was best. Not only god of chaos but Freaking Emperor think that Horus was best. Emperor has seen dead Sangy at Horus feet and still could not hate him enough to kill him.

So long story short: Nope.