Did Draigo fall to Slaanesh?

[thade]

For a rather lengthy discussion on canon - what it is, what it isn't, and how it fits (or doesn't fit) GW IP, see the discussion where A. D-B. said this to me.

 

I accept that every 'fact' GW prints anywhere is "canon" insofar as it is part of the lore, fitting into one of (or possibly both of) two categories:

• it's something that virtually everybody agrees upon, making it basically immutable; e.g. Ultramarines wear blue armor;
• it's a lie, like so much of 40K.

That last part is very important, because that is the established baseline upon which we all agree. The grim-dark is a large, scary, impossible to fathom place; it's history is sordid, confusing, and mostly burned to ashes and buried under dense, smelly layers of superstition and edict. What one Inquisitor swears his or her life and soul on, another one knows fully well it's a lie and that Inquisitor poses a serious threat. That is the underlying truth of 40K: that the underlying truth will forever elude us.

 

ADDENDUM: Also, see this article by the man himself.  http://www.boomtron.com/2011/03/grimdark-ii-loose-canon/

[Gentlemanloser]

An interesting discussion, but I'm not too worried about hierarchy.

 

You said it yourself;

 

 

Ultramarines are blue. We all know that and we really don't doubt it. Yet, if there is no canon, how can this one fact still be immutable? That's the question you're posing (really, it summarizes well what seems to be your position) and it has a simple answer that still fits what A D-B and V are saying. It's immutable because it's one of the few things we all uniformly agree on.

 

There are 'hardpoints', if the canon is immutable.  Then, the canon is immutable.  Until the canon if officially changed.

 

It's not because the fans agree Ultramarines are Blue.  It's the way the chapter has been described, in canon.

 

We could all agree, here and now, that the Grey Knights wear Pink Power Armour.  That doesn't make it canon.  Their canon colour is the 'grey' of base ceramite.  Whether you like that, or not.

 

There are opinions, lies and bias or information *inside* the setting.  Such as one Inquisitor to another.  But that doesn't hold to information *outside* the setting, past the third wall (is it?) and to the consumers, by the company.

[thade]

I think it's plainly obvious that 'Draigo' is not something we uniformly agree on, so it's not really immutable. 40K canon is best described as 'loose canon', per that article by A. D-B. (and the linked discussion).

[Visitor13]

I'd assume Mortarion had a bodyguard as well.

 

Angron had twelve Bloodthirsters; pre-Heresy he had twelve Terminators in his bodyguard - the Devourers. Doesn't seem to be a coincidence.

 

Similarly, Daemon Primarch Mortation would have had an analogue of the Deathshroud - at least two powerful daemons, most likely GUOs.

[IndigoJack]

 

 

I'd assume Mortarion had a bodyguard as well.

 

Angron had twelve Bloodthirsters; pre-Heresy he had twelve Terminators in his bodyguard - the Devourers. Doesn't seem to be a coincidence.

 

Similarly, Daemon Primarch Mortation would have had an analogue of the Deathshroud - at least two powerful daemons, most likely GUOs.

 

 

I don't think the bloodthirsters were his previous bodyguard though. Greater Daemons are no the same as daemon princes. Greater Daemons are basically large chunks of thier god given some kind of from and some small amount of will.

[Visitor13]

 

 

I'd assume Mortarion had a bodyguard as well.

 

Angron had twelve Bloodthirsters; pre-Heresy he had twelve Terminators in his bodyguard - the Devourers. Doesn't seem to be a coincidence.

 

Similarly, Daemon Primarch Mortation would have had an analogue of the Deathshroud - at least two powerful daemons, most likely GUOs.

 

I don't think the bloodthirsters were his previous bodyguard though. Greater Daemons are no the same as daemon princes. Greater Daemons are basically large chunks of thier god given some kind of from and some small amount of will.

 

I didn't say they were. Just that Angron seems to have kept some of the old legion traditions alive and got himself an entourage of twelve.

[Durus]

Gentlemanloser, with the current climate about posting things from codexes, I don't want to quote it, lest I meet the airlock, but for reference it is in the daemon codex in the section where it is describing the kingdoms of the chaos gods, on Slaanesh's page. The next time you make it to a gaming club or store with a preview copy take a look at it in there. It's a cool story.

I was paraphrasing from the cartoon 'Trials of Draigo' (I think that's the name) linked to the Lord Inquisitor movie. It's the scene were a Grey Knight captured in the warp is being, interrogated, by two Dameonettes.

Come to think of it, it might be possible that this is just a humorous nod in the cartoon's direction. Which would be pretty cool.

[Gentlemanloser]

 

Come to think of it, it might be possible that this is just a humorous
nod in the cartoon's direction. Which would be pretty cool.

 

That's indeed what it was. :)

 

 

I think it's plainly obvious that 'Draigo' is not something we uniformly
agree on, so it's not really immutable. 40K canon is best described as
'loose canon', per that article by A. D-B. (and the linked discussion).

 

Well that's rather the point. ;)

 

What we, as fans, belive doesn't matter in the slightest.  Only what the creators of the background belive, and have created, matters.

 

Either there are 'hardpoints', and thier given material is immuntible.

 

Or there's nothing.  No backstory, no setting. 

 

You can't have potions of narration being defined, and portions of naration that are lies.  It just doesn't work.

[thade]

Either there are 'hardpoints', and thier (sic) given material is immuntible.

 

Or there's nothing.  No backstory, no setting.

This is a false dichotomy, because

 

You can't have potions (sic) of narration being defined, and portions of naration (sic) that are lies.  It just doesn't work.

this is false. You can in fact have points defined of which some (or all) are lies. That's like Inquisition 101 right there. It works well. Not all of the information we are presented with is truthful; those presenting it may believe (very strongly, even) that it's true, but they may not always be correct.

 

We have an entire branch of Imperium Government that lies outside of the control structure to deal with this very thing. The entire populace is lied to by both their benefactors, their exploiters, and their predators. "Everything is a lie." For that statement to have meaning, you need to have a narrative that supports it...and we do.

 

Some of what we know is true. Some of it is false. What we believe is our choice. Whether we are correct...well, I'm not convinced that's even the most interesting meta-question that can be asked there. Should you manage to find the edge and peel back the curtain, you should most definitely expect to find another curtain, every time.

[TrashMan]

I donno.  Carving a name into the Heart of one, on a battlefield, sure smacks of 'roflstomping' to me.

 

 

Yes, because hacking someone down, and when he's lying on the floor, dead, carving a letter into his flesh is so damn difficult....

[TrashMan]

 

 

Again, it only took 2 GKGMs to take out Mortarion, but it took 100 GKTs to take down Angron? I'm sure there's a power difference between the two primarchs, but I don't think it's that much.

 

You mean just like how Superman can tank supernovas in one comic and in the other he struggles with lifting buildings?

 

When will you people understand that different writers have different visions of how strong/powerfull someone is.

Looking for a consistency as if 1 guy wrote is FUTILE.

 

Speaking of which, what makes you think that 2GK GM's vs. a demon primarch is innacurate, and the Angron example  is accurate and not the other way around?

 

The strength and power (and many other things..like personalities) of every single individual tend ot constantly change in long-ruing, multi-author franchises.

 

 

 

I really like the GK fluff but really, Draigo is a bit over the top, don't you think?

 

No, I don't.

 

 

 

EDIT:

 

Also, agreeing on something is irrelevant.

You can BELIVE something to not be canon or accurate or to be a lie if it helps you sleep at night.

I call that self-dellusion.

[Visitor13]

At the end of the day it doesn't matter if the Draigo vs Mortarion thing makes sense or not.

What matters is that it was supposed to make the readers go FTW. Instead it made many of them go .

Therefore it's simply badly written.

[Gentlemanloser]

Thade, there's a massive difference between in character naration (which we sould all be able to read, and understand the inherant bias) and out of caracter setting information.

 

The former can, and most liekly is sedition, lies, misdirection, or misunderstanding.

 

The later, cannot be.

 

GW cannot lie to us, the consumers, about thier own setting. 

 

And if they do, then *none* of it can be taken is immutable.  No matter how much we, the fans, agree on it.

 

There either is an Emperor on the Golden Throne, or there isn't, and none of the setting actually exists.  It's not a false dichotomy.

 

Edit: The description of Draigo in the GK Codex isn't in character narration from a Shady Inquisitorial source.  It's out of charcater setting information from GW to us.

[thade]

Most of us agree on the Emperor, making him effectively immutable. Other points don't hold up so well; did you read that A. D-B. article?

Question everything. What part of "everything" doesn't cover everything?

[Skylifter]

And the Emperor might actually not be the Emperor. As in they may have put the wrong guy on the Golden Throne: Horus. So so much about most of us agreeing about the Emperor. 

[Gentlemanloser]

Fans do not dictate 'canon'. That's kind of the point mate.

The half and half notion that some out of charcater background is immuatble and some is lies, is well, silly and unthoughtout. It just doesn't work.

In character, yeah, totally.

But you don't lie to the consumers.

Guys, buy our game! It's about Space Marines that fight an eternal war. Execpt the pace Marines don't really exist, and there is no war.

Hell, you don't lie about your IP.

How could you possibly Trade Mark 'Space Marine' if you agree that, well, they don't really exist, and can be anything you want them to be.

Edit: Oh you can totally mask and hide stuff from the consumers. Big reveals and all that.

But there is *someone* on a Golden Throne. And the Space Marines exist. And They are Genetic Super Soldiers. And on and on.

[thade]

Who does dictate the canon? There is no definitive list of what is and what is not canon. (Again, the A. D-B. article; and the quote I linked to of his.) There are things we all accept and things we do not; there are things that contradict one another, and no shortage of overlap between those two sets. It can't all be true, and we can't really nail down what is and what isn't.

 

So I feel my interpretation fits the scene rather well; the more free an Inquisitor is with his or her scrutiny, the longer lived that Inquisitor will be. "Blessed is the mind too small for doubt" is an edict for the Imperium at large to maintain control and limit panic. Doubt is a right reserved for the very powerful: the Inquisition, the Lords of Terra, the highest levels of the Imperium. (That's, ostensibly, us.)

[Gentlemanloser]

I read the article.

 

Those employed by GW do.  GW, BL, FW (and by extension the FFG RPGs).

 

They all do.  And yes, becuase GW is, er, loose, with thier hold on their IP, then you can get canon conflicts.

 

Never intented to imply you don't or won't.

 

But it's all true.  And all Canon.

 

Conflicts, you'll have to sort out yourself. ;)

[thade]

Conflicts, you'll have to sort out yourself.

You're not really answering the question there, or maybe you're implying that there is no answer? I pitched a method to sort the conflicts: they're plain evidence of heresy and demonic influence.

It's a loose canon; any attempt to baton it down is sure to fail. Hence my rather open and questioning stance on it.

ADDENDUM: I should add, it's totally fine that there's no answer to that question. That's more or less the stance I have already. "There is no canon." is a rather extremist way to put it, but when everything is questionable it makes it dubious. Certainly some of it must be 'true'; likely there's a modicum of truth to everything, even the more dubious stuff. That's why we get to take what we like and eschew what we don't for our own fluff creations.

[Gentlemanloser]

You can't have in character/setting influence out of character/setting information.

 

 

GW don't control thier IP tight enough to allow a robust setting without inconsitencies.  Some say that's the way to allow organic growth.

 

I disagree, I think it's laxity.

 

(I answered the Question though, anything produced by GW/BL/FW/FFG is canon.)

 

 

If you want an example, take a look at the old World of Darkness sourcebooks.  The none rule areas are written in character.  With bias and flavour of a character in the setting.

 

the 40k rulebook and Codexes aren't/  (not saying they don't contain in character stories, snippets or quotes...)

[thade]

GW don't control thier IP tight enough to allow a robust setting without inconsitencies.  Some say that's the way to allow organic growth.

 

I disagree, I think it's laxity.

Laxity is too dismissive a term here; it's a rather massive and time-consuming undertaking to make sure that every single author working on the IP (and every single fact that they spit out) all fits into the universe without conflict. Marvel did this for years and finally gave up as the cost was huge and all it really did in their eyes was block creativity.

 

I see all of the fluff I'm presented with as if it's presented to me through some character's eyes. It's all Inquisitorial reports (if we're lucky), first or second hand eye-witness accounts from whoever, maybe the perspective of an Eldar that we can't really comprehend...more or less the way the older codecies were laid out. (Orcs at the end of 4th Ed. start of 5th; Daemonhunters; etc.)

 

We don't have the luxury of an omniscient narrator which is kind of cool; it's a very effective (if incidental) way of selling the Grim Dark: so much is unknowable, so much is forgotten. Human beings are extremely fallible, they manufacture and modify memories after-the-fact in order to keep a calm and reasonably cohesive worldview, meaning those accounts we get are going to be bonk. (Hence we get extreme examples, like Draigo, Necron/Marine Bro-fist, choose your pet-peeve in the "canon".)

 

In a galaxy as huge and complex as the one we get in 40K, it's unreasonable for an audience (that's realworld us) to expect real answers to things, because in order to make the galaxy seem "vast and unknowable" it's got to pitch as much mystery at us as possible. Conflict in the canon is a rather effective (again, if incidental) method to enhance that feeling of mystique.

 

That is the way I've come to see it.

[Disruptor_fe404]

If you want an example, take a look at the old World of Darkness sourcebooks.  The none rule areas are written in character.  With bias and flavour of a character in the setting.

 

the 40k rulebook and Codexes aren't/  (not saying they don't contain in character stories, snippets or quotes...)

 

Why do you assume that the non-rule parts of any Codex aren't written in-character? Or in-faction, if you prefer.

[Gentlemanloser]

Marvel is a tad larger, with just a few more storylines/arcs than 40k though.

I doubt GW even have a single editor responsible for trying to keep the setting consistent. We'd see a marked difference, with a wager no loss of creativity, if they did.

I see all of the fluff I'm presented with as if it's presented to me through some character's eyes.

That's cool and all, but that's just how you reconsile the inconsistencies. The books aren't written like that though.

Why do you assume that the non-rule parts of any Codex aren't written in-character? Or in-faction, if you prefer.

Becuase there's zero evidence of it.

[Disruptor_fe404]

Becuase there's zero evidence of it.

 

Debatable, but I can see where you're coming from.

 

I've actually lost track of where people stand on Draigo being that Marine. But then, I'm not that invested in Grey Knight fluff anyway.

 

For the record, I tihnk it's Draigo purely off the law of notability.

[franzdietrich]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfJUi4cB4oc

This video answers the OP's question