A very weird idea I just had to share about Sevatar

[b1soul]

*snip*

You basically have two arguments...both of which are based more on speculation than on actual evidence.

 

Argument #1 (your in-universe argument): Sev uses a halberd. Khyron uses a halberd. They're the same guy.

What you seem to be implying is that Khyron/Sevatar chooses a force halberd because his original weapon is a halberd of some sort (Sev's chain-halberd).

 

This argument is weak because there are plenty of alternate explanations that make just as much sense.

The halberd becomes more and more preferred among the early GK and Khyron switches to it later in his career

As a GM, Khyron has mastered multiple weapon-types over the course of his career (the halberd being one of many)

 

Keep in mind that the statue of Khyron is likely made after his death and probably doesn't represent Khyron right after he's recruited (when he's most likely to use something similar to his original weapon)

 

Heck, Khyron could be a TSon. TSons seem to favour halberds of this sort (also see TSons artwork in Collected Visions). The "treacheries" Khyron mentions could refer to the TSons' continued practice of sorcery after Nikaea. My speculations are as good as yours.

 

Argument #2 (your out-of-universe argument): ADB is purposefully giving us a hint because he created both characters (Khyron and Sev) and gave both of them halberds.

 

Just as likely, ADB could've given two characters the same type of weapon without intending for them to be the same character...

We can't read ADB's intentions without more information. Let's not try to read the authour's mind...

 

The evidence for your argument boils down to...

1) the two characters have the same authour [maybe ADB wants to link these two characters of his creation, maybe he doesn't, who knows...well, only ADB]

2) the two characters have the same type of weapon [very weak connection]

3) Khyron's inscription makes a vague reference to "treacheries" [a lot of alternate explanations available]

 

In my opinion, the above isn't enough to make a convincing argument, especially in light of how suspicious and distrustful the Imperium has become after learning of Horus's treachery.

 

Because it's not as simple as simple trust and loyalty. Malcador isn't asking for Rubio to be recruited based on trust alone, or sending Garro to Isstvan III on a mere hunch. He is an incredibly powerful psyker whose powers likely land him a supernatural perspective on who he should recuit and why.

It's not only about loyalty, but I'm almost certain that never having betrayed the Emperor is necessary (but not sufficient) for becoming a GK. Recruiting loyalists of traitor legions makes sense. These guys stayed loyal even as their primarchs and brothers turned. Recruiting Jago "Death to the False Emperor" Sevatar doesn't, unless you completely mind-wipe him. That would be interesting and slightly more believable (only slightly because Khyron's reference to his "treacheries" wouldn't make much sense in that case)

 

The "hints" people are pointing out are tenuous at best.

Loyalty and trust matter a lot. They're not the only issue, but previous status as an actual "Death to the False Emperor" traitor (not a loyalist of a traitor legion) would be a huge obstacle to becoming a founding member of the GK.

[Phoebus]

This would be the same conversation Sevatar had before he led his loyal troops into certain death aboard the Dark Angel's flag ship to be at his Primarch's side, right?

 

I'm re-reading the above, and I know it sounds condescending and obnoxious, but I'm starting to wonder if I read a different "Prince of Crows" than some of the other posters, because the impression that I took away from it was a Jago Sevatarion who would willingly follow Curze into Hell (and arguably has), a man whose reaction upon being taken captive by the Dark Angels is "Well, time to kill everything on this ship and hopefully re unite with the Primarch." And the conclusion I'm drawing is that either I or they have completely missed a lot of not just subtext but, you know, actual text.

I can't see how my post led you to arrive to your above argument. Once again:

 

"I don't think it itself was what will cause Sevatar to turn (assuming it will, that is), but I think it will have been... a seed, if you will."

 

You basically have two arguments...both of which are based more on speculation than on actual evidence.

No kidding? ;)

 

Of course they are based on speculation! My entire premise on this is that the author in question is offering loose, thematic hints to connect two (well, one if you believe me) characters from two different stories. I have consistently pointed out that this has nothing to do with how common or uncommon the halberd is among the Legiones Astartes or the Grey Knights, but rather with the idea that authors in this series haven't been dropping even loose hints without some purpose behind them.

 

So if you want to say that my argument is a reach, then by all means - say so. Tell me flat out that A D-B isn't hinting at anything with Khyron's epitaph, his statue's "body language", or the portrayal of a weapon associated with one of his most famous characters. We'll agree to disagree and go our own ways.

 

But when you instead offer that ...

 

The halberd becomes more and more preferred among the early GK and Khyron switches to it later in his career

As a GM, Khyron has mastered multiple weapon-types over the course of his career (the halberd being one of many)

... then I reserve the right to point out that you're absolutely making assumptions of your own - assumptions that are informed less by what we've seen in the Garro stories thus far and more with what 40k Grey Knights are like.

 

Keep in mind that the statue of Khyron is likely made after his death and probably doesn't represent Khyron right after he's recruited (when he's most likely to use something similar to his original weapon)

Assumption, conjecture. Good stuff, you're entitled to it, and I'm not saying this without any hint of mockery. But at the end of the day, my theory is simply based on the idea that the author is trying to tell us something. Yours is that he's not. All you have to do is tell me that. You don't have to provide me with hypothetical counter-examples (though I don't mind reading them); this theory is about what A D-B wrote, not what you and I might imagine. :(

 

Heck, Khyron could be a TSon. TSons seem to favour halberds of this sort (also see TSons artwork in Collected Visions). The "treacheries" Khyron mentions could refer to the TSons' continued practice of sorcery after Nikaea. My speculations are as good as yours.

Or he could be an Emperor's Children member of the Phoenix Guard. They, too, fought with halberd-like weapons. That's not the point, though. This is about what A D-B wrote, and whether he has offered hints between Khyron and one of his prominent characters. Given that he hasn't written prominent Thousand Son and Emperor's Children characters, how is this either here or there?

 

Just as likely, ADB could've given two characters the same type of weapon without intending for them to be the same character...

We can't read ADB's intentions without more information. Let's not try to read the authour's mind...

Of course not. Hence why it's a theory. Personally speaking, I wouldn't expect A D-B to spill the beans this early on a forum. I do think it speaks volumes that, without championing this theory, he's questioned why one would rule out Sevatar as Khyron. In fact, the very arguments he questioned are ones you've brought up.

 

In my opinion, the above isn't enough to make a convincing argument, ...

Again, of course it's not! It's just a theory. :)

 

... especially in light of how suspicious and distrustful the Imperium has become after learning of Horus's treachery.

But that's neither here nor there. The suspiciousness and lack of trust of the Imperium have nothing to do with the recruitment process of those eight warriors - whose identities will end up being a total secret by virtue of false identities, by the way.

 

It's not only about loyalty, but I'm almost certain that never having betrayed the Emperor is necessary (but not sufficient) for becoming a GK.

That's your assumption, though. Thus far, none of us have had any insight on the criteria Malcador is basing his recruitment on. I could just as easily argue that Malcador wants four Loyalists from Traitor Legions balanced against four reformed Traitors. I have no idea if that's going to be the case, of course. All I'm saying for certain is that conventional notions of trust have had nothing to do with it so far. Garro goes where Malcador sends him, and at least one of those trips has been based purely on psychic insight. If he goes after Sevatar, that's because something will have happened to the Night Lord that has changed his allegiances.