Did the Ultramarines lose at Calth?

[Antarius]

How did I skip that over?

Ehm, by not responding to it in any way whatsoever? It had nothing to do with the Batman thing, if that's what you're getting at.

 

For what it's worth I still think it's a pretty good question -why is it that we have lots of real-world mythology where even actual gods get tricked or "taken out" by sorcery or less formidable means, but we don't go around saying "man, Thor is such a weak-ass punk" so why is the scenario on p. 383 of KNF so utterly damning of Guilliman's "power level"?

 

The thing is, Guilliman going down to sorcery didn't phaze me for a second when I read it and I'm a huge 40K fluff reader. Believe it or not, it didn't even register as something that was "a thing" at all. Perhaps because I'm just not that hung up on the "power level" nonsense. Any of the primarchs could go down to pretty much any sort of attack, given the right circumstances.

If things had panned out so Russ took a bolter shell to the brain fired by a crippled child by accident he'd be dead, Primarch or not. It wouldn't reflect badly on his ability to drink lots of really strong beer and choke Orks with his mighty pigtails at all.

 

But you know what. Never mind. There's no point in debating this with you, because you're not debating you're just "pointing out what happened" and if the rest of us don't agree 100% with your ridiculous take on a bunch of fictional events, we are "scrambling" and "bending over backwards" because apparently we have this really deep need to "justify" the writing in KNF.

[Gree]

How did I skip that over?

Ehm, by not responding to it in any way whatsoever? It had nothing to do with the Batman thing, if that's what you're getting at.

 

I thought I responded to it just fine Either way such a point had already been covered plenty of times?

 

For what it's worth I still think it's a pretty good question -why is it that we have lots of real-world mythology where even actual gods get tricked or "taken out" by sorcery or less formidable means, but we don't go around saying "man, Thor is such a weak-ass punk" so why is the scenario on p. 383 of KNF so utterly damning of Guilliman's "power level"?

 

For one thing you have ausch a huge volume of myth that stretches back thousands of years. The Primarchs are portrayed much differently and on a different power level in a shorter amount of time. And exactly how many times has Thor been taken out in three hits in combat?

 

The thing is, Guilliman going down to sorcery didn't phaze me for a second when I read it and I'm a huge 40K fluff reader. Believe it or not, it didn't even register as something that was "a thing" at all. Perhaps because I'm just not that hung up on the "power level" nonsense. Any of the primarchs could go down to pretty much any sort of attack, given the right circumstances.

 

I have no opposition to Guilliman being taken off guard from behind or something like that. But they faced off directly and Guilliman lost with Kor Phaeron sparing his life. It also effectively confirms that Lorgar would have slaughtered Guilliman had he been present at Calth.

 

But you know what. Never mind. There's no point in debating this with you, because you're not debating you're just "pointing out what happened" and if the rest of us don't agree 100% with your ridiculous take on a bunch of fictional events, we are "scrambling" and "bending over backwards" because apparently we have this really deep need to "justify" the writing in KNF.

 

No, I am simply responding and defending my views. If you don't agree then don't get snippy about it. I can acknowledge that others hold different views, but don't call my view ''ridiculous''.

 

(Although, granted, with my statements to Legatus earlier this looks somewhat hypocritical, but I hope my point was made.)

[Pulse]

And exactly how many times has Thor been taken out in three hits in combat?

Thor was beaten by a wet-nurse called Elli who didn't even need to strike him to get him to drop to one knee and lose the fight - so he was beaten without taking a single hit.

[Gree]

For one thing you have ausch a huge volume of myth that stretches back thousands of years. The Primarchs are portrayed much differently and on a different power level in a shorter amount of time. And exactly how many times has Thor been taken out in three hits in combat?

Thor was beaten by a wet-nurse called Elli who didn't even need to punch him to get him to drop to one knee and lose the fight.

 

See? Norse myths can have horrible representations too.

 

Now if you had Russ be beaten by a wet-nurse then the Space Wolf fandom would have exploded like an H-bomb.

[Pulse]

See? Norse myths can have horrible representations too.

 

Now if you had Russ be beaten by a wet-nurse then the Space Wolf fandom would have exploded like an H-bomb.

Nothing horrible about the myth, its basically a story that states that just because Thor is a god doesn't mean he cannot be beaten through something fairly simple.

[Gree]

See? Norse myths can have horrible representations too.

 

Now if you had Russ be beaten by a wet-nurse then the Space Wolf fandom would have exploded like an H-bomb.

Nothing horrible about the myth, its basically a story that states that just because Thor is a god doesn't mean he cannot be beaten through something fairly simple.

 

And if Thor was written for a current fandom in a modern fictional setting then things probably would be different.

 

Again, I point to my Russ example.

[Pulse]

And if Thor was written for a current fandom in a modern fictional setting then things probably would be different.

 

Again, I point to my Russ example.

Why?

 

If i read a Primarch get smashed to the ground by someone that isn't another Primarch or a being made of awesome and win, i'd be like "yeh they can be beaten so what?" but we know that anyway.

[Gree]

And if Thor was written for a current fandom in a modern fictional setting then things probably would be different.

 

Again, I point to my Russ example.

Why?

 

If i read a Primarch get smashed to the ground by someone that isn't another Primarch or a being made of awesome and win, i'd be like "yeh they can be beaten so what?" but we know that anyway.

 

Because Primarchs are generally portayed as greatly superior to normal Astartes. Having Guilliman being taken out by the sidekick makes him just look weak compared to the sidekick's boss and the rest of the brothers. It's even worse when said character has never been portrayed as a master sorcerer or fighter before. Kor Phaeron did not blindside or attack a weakened Guilliman, they faced off and it was Guilliman who had to resort to a sucker punch.

 

To use Star Wars, as an example, it's like Nute Gunray suddenly whipping out force powers and beating up Obi-Wan Kenobi without Obi-Wan getting a single hit back.

[Pulse]

Because Primarchs are generally portayed as greatly superior to normal Astartes. Having Guilliman being taken out by the sidekick makes him just look weak compared to the sidekick's boss and the rest of the brothers. It's even worse when said character has never been portrayed as a master sorcerer or fighter before. Kor Phaeron did not blindside or attack a weakened Guilliman, they faced off and it was Guilliman who had to resort to a sucker punch.

 

I understand why it looks a bit off why Guilliman was floored the way he was but as i said just because your a god-like being doesn't mean you can't be be beaten, even by a "lesser" being. Clearly Kor Phaeron was just better (for lack of a better word) at the point in time.

 

Take the film The Dark Knight Rises, when Bane dishes out punishment to Batman - your like "WOAH, WHAT? THAT EASILY?" but Bane realises that Batman has lost his focus for that fight and so can easily outmatch him at that point in time, so from a fight perspective you could say the same for Guilliman at that point.

[Gree]

Because Primarchs are generally portayed as greatly superior to normal Astartes. Having Guilliman being taken out by the sidekick makes him just look weak compared to the sidekick's boss and the rest of the brothers. It's even worse when said character has never been portrayed as a master sorcerer or fighter before. Kor Phaeron did not blindside or attack a weakened Guilliman, they faced off and it was Guilliman who had to resort to a sucker punch.

 

I understand why it looks a bit off why Guilliman was floored the way he was but as i said just because your a god-like being doesn't mean you can't be be beaten, even by a "lesser" being. Clearly Kor Phaeron was just better at the point in time.

 

So Kor Phaeron> Guilliman, which is exactly what I've been criticising. You would expect something like that to occur in a Word Bearers novel, not the Ultramarines introduction novel.

[Pulse]

So Kor Phaeron> Guilliman, which is exactly what I've been criticising. You would expect something like that to occur in a Word Bearers novel, not the Ultramarines introduction novel.

Ok yeh i agree, that is a bit lame for a first novel, hopefully they use that point as a stepping stone or driving force for Guilliman to recover.

[Captain Idaho]

Because Primarchs are generally portayed as greatly superior to normal Astartes. Having Guilliman being taken out by the sidekick makes him just look weak compared to the sidekick's boss and the rest of the brothers. It's even worse when said character has never been portrayed as a master sorcerer or fighter before. Kor Phaeron did not blindside or attack a weakened Guilliman, they faced off and it was Guilliman who had to resort to a sucker punch.

 

I understand why it looks a bit off why Guilliman was floored the way he was but as i said just because your a god-like being doesn't mean you can't be be beaten, even by a "lesser" being. Clearly Kor Phaeron was just better at the point in time.

 

So Kor Phaeron> Guilliman, which is exactly what I've been criticising. You would expect something like that to occur in a Word Bearers novel, not the Ultramarines introduction novel.

 

The thing you are missing is BL don't produce a novel, particularly a Heresy novel, just to appease fanboys of the faction involved.

 

And going back to what you said earlier; yes you are contradicting yourself and it's glaringly obvious. You recognise the Heresy series is going to be different to the "historical" viewpoint of Codex material, yet you refuse to disregard information from the Codex material simply because it hasn't been changed yet. That means when Luthor fights the Lion and it's completely different to the Codex portrayal, you're argument here is wrong as it's built on obsolete information.

 

In other words, you're making assumptions nothing will change when you've said the BL team are changing everything as they get to it.

 

Ultimately what damages the reputation of Ultras fans is when they expect to win without resistance or challenge and anything that doesn't show this is terrible etc.

[Gree]

The thing you are missing is BL don't produce a novel, particularly a Heresy novel, just to appease fanboys of the faction involved.

 

Is that how Russ was treated in Prospero Burns or Fulgrim in his titular novel?

 

And going back to what you said earlier; yes you are contradicting yourself and it's glaringly obvious.

 

How so?

 

And going back to what you said earlier; yes you are contradicting yourself and it's glaringly obvious. You recognise the Heresy series is going to be different to the "historical" viewpoint of Codex material, yet you refuse to disregard information from the Codex material simply because it hasn't been changed yet. That means when Luthor fights the Lion and it's completely different to the Codex portrayal, you're argument here is wrong as it's built on obsolete information.

 

There has been no change to the fight yet, so it is not obsolete. Point stands.

[pingo]

The thing you are missing is BL don't produce a novel, particularly a Heresy novel, just to appease fanboys of the faction involved.

 

Is that how Russ was treated in Prospero Burns or Fulgrim in his titular novel?

The portrayal of primarchs has not always been flattering, and I would contend that it probably shouldn't be.

 

There was no small streak of hypocracy in Russ's portrayal, especially in A Thousand Sons. Fulgrim was pretty vain (or is that pretty and vain ;)) in Fulgrim, but that would be expected.

 

Magnus was protrayed as monumentally arrogant in A Thousand Sons, the Lion was portrayed as being unable to understand others on a kind of emotional/social level, Corax was portrayed as being emotionally scarred and disturbed by Istvaan and perhaps even caught up in his own hubris, Manus was too hot-headed at Istvaan, the list could go on.

 

As for the Emperor ... :)

 

While some of those are traits we knew a primarch had, not one seems to have been cast in an entirely positive light or to 'appease fanboys'. There's no reason for Guilliman to be different. He lost his infamous level headed coolness and gave into his passion. He said as much. He rushed in, and was sucker punched. By gods acting through a pawn.

[Gree]

The thing you are missing is BL don't produce a novel, particularly a Heresy novel, just to appease fanboys of the faction involved.

 

Is that how Russ was treated in Prospero Burns or Fulgrim in his titular novel?

The portrayal of primarchs has not always been flattering, and I would contend that it probably shouldn't be.

 

There was no small streak of hypocracy in Russ's portrayal, especially in A Thousand Sons. Fulgrim was pretty vain (or is that pretty and vain :P) in Fulgrim, but that would be expected.

 

Magnus was protrayed as monumentally arrogant in A Thousand Sons, the Lion was portrayed as being unable to understand others on a kind of emotional/social level, Corax was portrayed as being emotionally scarred and disturbed by Istvaan and perhaps even caught up in his own hubris, Manus was too hot-headed at Istvaan, the list could go on.

 

As for the Emperor ... :blink:

 

While some of those are traits we knew a primarch had, not one seems to have been cast in an entirely positive light or to 'appease fanboys'. There's no reason for Guilliman to be different. He lost his infamous level headed coolness and gave into his passion. He said as much. He rushed in, and was sucker punched. By gods acting through a pawn.

 

I speak not of characterization. I speak of combat prowess. Was Corax beaten by Kor Phaeron? Was Russ beaten by Ahirman? Was Magnus beaten by Pre-Dreadnought Bjorn? Was Fulgrim beaten by Eldrad's sidekick? Was Lorgar beaten up by Marius Gage?

 

In their introduction novels about their Legions, were any of the Primarchs beaten up by someone preivously thought as a slimy weasel by most of the fandom? By someone who really should be far weaker than them? Again, before this novel nobody would have seriously claimed that Kor Phaeron could beat Guilliman.

 

To use my Star Wars example again, it's like Nute Gunray or Grand Moff Tarkin suddenly kicking Obi-Wan's butt.

 

As stated before, Lorgar vs Corax or the Lion vs Curze is a much better fight. Lorgar rushed in, but he still had an good fight with Corax and he still got some hits in. By comparison the fight in KNF is just lacking by comparison.

[Captain Idaho]

The thing you are missing is BL don't produce a novel, particularly a Heresy novel, just to appease fanboys of the faction involved.

 

Is that how Russ was treated in Prospero Burns or Fulgrim in his titular novel?

 

And going back to what you said earlier; yes you are contradicting yourself and it's glaringly obvious.

 

How so?

 

And going back to what you said earlier; yes you are contradicting yourself and it's glaringly obvious. You recognise the Heresy series is going to be different to the "historical" viewpoint of Codex material, yet you refuse to disregard information from the Codex material simply because it hasn't been changed yet. That means when Luthor fights the Lion and it's completely different to the Codex portrayal, you're argument here is wrong as it's built on obsolete information.

 

There has been no change to the fight yet, so it is not obsolete. Point stands.

 

Did you actually read what I said (or anyone else for that matter) or are you just going to repeat yourself again? The point doesn't stand, as I explained. I can't do any more to help you comprehend the points raised that explain how your interpretations are flawed, as you either are ignoring the points raised or don't get them, so I guess I'm just going to have to bow out of this discussion.

[pingo]

I speak not of characterization. I speak of combat prowess.

Fine: Idaho's quote and your response didn't mention that.

 

Not sure combat prowess is really quantifiable, but that's another debate :P

 

Was Corax beaten by Kor Phaeron? Was Russ beaten by Ahirman? Was Magnus beaten by Pre-Dreadnought Bjorn? Was Fulgrim beaten by Eldrad's sidekick? Was Lorgar beaten up by Marius Gage?

Was Optimus Prime beaten up by Spongebob Squarepants?

 

Silly rhetorical questions aside, you seem to be ignoring the entirety of what Kor Phaeron was, who his puppetmasters were, and focussing only on the 'lesser Space Marine' part.

 

In their introduction novels about their Legions, were any of the Primarchs beaten up by someone preivously thought as a slimy weasel by most of the fandom? By someone who really should be far weaker than them? Again, before this novel nobody would have seriously claimed that Kor Phaeron could beat Guilliman.

All true, but I can't see the relevance of saying that before something happened no one could have known that thing would happen.

 

To use my Star Wars example again, it's like Nute Gunray or Grand Moff Tarkin suddenly kicking Obi-Wan's butt.

Don't give Lucas ideas :blink:

 

Though, plenty of Jedi were killed in those films by 'lesser' beings.

 

To use another Star Wars example: what about the Rebels beating the Empire? Or Luke blowing up a Death Star in 'one hit' with his eyes closed?

 

I don't think examples drawn from other sources will get us very far as we're talking about a somewhat unique situation and characters that are somewhat vaguely defined.

 

As stated before, Lorgar vs Corax or the Lion vs Curze is a much better fight. Lorgar rushed in, but he still had an good fight with Corax and he still got some hits in. By comparison the fight in KNF is just lacking by comparison.

Fair enough. If you feel those are better, then cool. I'd probably agree.

[Gree]

Did you actually read what I said (or anyone else for that matter) or are you just going to repeat yourself again?

 

I read it. Your words did not convince me at all.

 

The point doesn't stand, as I explained.

 

it most certainly does stand.

 

I can't do any more to help you comprehend the points raised that explain how your interpretations are flawed, as you either are ignoring the points raised or don't get them, so I guess I'm just going to have to bow out of this discussion.

 

I understand them full well, but they simply don't apply. There has been no retcon so the fluff still stands.

 

Not sure combat prowess is really quantifiable, but that's another debate :blink:

 

Combat prowess is most certainly quatifiable. We have feats for a reason.

 

Silly rhetorical questions aside, you seem to be ignoring the entirety of what Kor Phaeron was, who his puppetmasters were, and focussing only on the 'lesser Space Marine' part.

 

Because that's what he was. In the end he was just a sidekick.

 

Russ beat Magnus.

 

Sanguinius beat a Bloodthrister.

 

Lorgar beat a Bloodthrister.

 

Guilliman was beaten by Lorgar's sidekick, who suddenly is this super-awesome sorcerer out of the left field.

 

All true, but I can't see the relevance of saying that before something happened no one could have known that thing would happen.

 

I am pointing out that nobody would seriously argue that Kor Phaeron could do this, but now that he did it people are scalmbing to find justifications.

 

Though, plenty of Jedi were killed in those films by 'lesser' beings.

 

Irrelevant. I speak of main characters and their feats. The standard red shirt Jedi is not important.

 

To use another Star Wars example: what about the Rebels beating the Empire? Or Luke blowing up a Death Star in 'one hit' with his eyes closed?

 

Both were clearly built up and explained. Both did not have other examples of various other ways. And more importantly both were done by the protagonists or protagonist faction. Luke destroying the Death Star was built up and explained, and even then Luke had a hell of a fight to get there. The rebels also had a hell of a fight before they finally took out the Empire. Even after that it took years to finally defeat the Empire in the EU.

 

In those films the rebellions and Luke were the protagonists heroes. They were clearly built up as part of your standard clichés trope and their victories understandable and expected as part of that genre. In KNF what we essentially have is the slimy smug snake chancellor whip out magic superpowers and take out the majestic demigod, despite said demigod’s brothers taking out Titans, Bloodthirsters and super-psykers far stronger than Kor Phaeron.

 

No, I’m afraid the situation is not the plucky band of incredible heroes standing against incredible odds. It’s a guy like Nute Gunray kicking Obi-Wan’s butt.

 

Guilliman was taken out in three shots without a chance of getting a single hit in. That is a poor peformance in comparison to his brothers. You cannot claim that Guilliman did as well as Russ, Sanguinius or even Lorgar.

[Captain Idaho]

Did you actually read what I said (or anyone else for that matter) or are you just going to repeat yourself again?

 

I read it. Your words did not convince me at all.

 

The point doesn't stand, as I explained.

 

it most certainly does stand.

 

I can't do any more to help you comprehend the points raised that explain how your interpretations are flawed, as you either are ignoring the points raised or don't get them, so I guess I'm just going to have to bow out of this discussion.

 

I understand them full well, but they simply don't apply. There has been no retcon so the fluff still stands.

 

No you don't understand them full well, as otherwise you wouldn't think they (or all the other countless counter points to your views you can read in this topic) didn't apply.

 

And there is no need for you to make so many quotes making the same point. It is aggravating and patronising, plus it hides the discussion in pointless information.

[Gree]

No you don't understand them full well, as otherwise you wouldn't think they (or all the other countless counter points to your views you can read in this topic) didn't apply.

 

I understand them fine. They simply don't apply. Your argument is not valid.

 

Plus I thought you said you were dropping out of this?

 

And there is no need for you to make so many quotes making the same point. It is aggravating and patronising, plus it hides the discussion in pointless information.

 

Very well then, I shall try and cut back.

[pingo]

You cannot claim that Guilliman did as well as Russ, Sanguinius or even Lorgar.

Nope. And I am not.

 

I simply read the book, took in the information, absorbed, and interpreted it according to how I saw it. And that's no less valid that your interpretation. Idaho contends that your interpretation is flawed. I wouldn't be so strong about it myself, I just see yours as different to mine. The problem is, it's in the book now so I guess you're pretty bummed about it. The good think about 40K fluff is you can ignore it if you like. I guess you're not going to be persuaded to re-evaluate the battle, which is a shame as it seems like it's tarnished for you.

 

Though, plenty of Jedi were killed in those films by 'lesser' beings.

 

Irrelevant. I speak of main characters and their feats. The standard red shirt Jedi is not important.

 

:blush:

 

So you want to pick and choose your evidence, selecting only those things which support your point of view?

 

Seems that every time someone tries to counter a point you have made you pull out the 'no, I was speaking of this specific thing' card. Perhaps you should clarify precisely which specific thing you are talking about as I'm clearly not getting it ...

 

There has been no retcon so the fluff still stands.

But you are complaining based on previous fluff Kor could not have done something like take down a primarch, essentially complaining about a retcon from your perspective.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Right, so. Some people are angry that G-man got beat by a non-Primarch. Others are not so angry, and neither the twain shall meet.

 

With that out of the way, did we ever the settle the question "Did the Ultramarines lose at Calth?" 'Cause you know, that's sort of the whole point of the thread and all. Plus, I like this thread but don't like reading the same arguments over and over again.

[Gree]

I simply read the book, took in the information, absorbed, and interpreted it according to how I saw it. And that's no less valid that your interpretation. Idaho contends that your interpretation is flawed. I wouldn't be so strong about it myself, I just see yours as different to mine. The problem is, it's in the book now so I guess you're pretty bummed about it. The good think about 40K fluff is you can ignore it if you like. I guess you're not going to be persuaded to re-evaluate the battle, which is a shame as it seems like it's tarnished for you.

 

I can ''ignore it'' but it won't stop people from bringing it up in future discussions about the Ultramarines. When people get into a discussion about ''which Primarch is the toughest'' and they cite Guilliman's defeat, I am backed into a corner now.

 

So you want to pick and choose your evidence, selecting only those things which support your point of view?

 

Not at all. I simply point out what is valid. Do you understand the difference between a main character and a red shirt?

 

But you are complaining based on previous fluff Kor could not have done something like take down a primarch, essentially complaining about a retcon from your perspective.

 

...And? How is that relevant to the argument?

[pingo]

I simply point out what is valid. Do you understand the difference between a main character and a red shirt?

Ignoring the veiled insult ...

 

Of course I do, but why is comparative 'power levels' a more valid thing to talk about with regards to main characters than secondary characters? Essentially: why isn't it valid. You are very good at pointing out which arguments you think are invalid but you fail to say why. It's getting in the way of a proper discussion.

 

But you are complaining based on previous fluff Kor could not have done something like take down a primarch, essentially complaining about a retcon from your perspective.

 

...And? How is that relevant to the argument?

Just pointing out a contradiction as you claimed there was no retcon. Nothing much here is relevant to anything really.

[Gree]

Ignoring the veiled insult ...

 

What veiled insult?

 

Of course I do, but why is comparative 'power levels' a more valid thing to talk about with regards to main characters than secondary characters? Essentially: why isn't it valid. You are very good at pointing out which arguments you think are invalid but you fail to say why. It's getting in the way of a proper discussion.

 

Because main characters are more powerful and more narratively important. Standards that apply to them don't apply to red shirt characters. Bringing up ''plenty of Jedi get killed by lesser beings'' does not matter when I'm talking about main character Obi-Wan Kenobi.

 

Just pointing out a contradiction as you claimed there was no retcon.

 

Where exactly did I say that? Where is the contradiction?