Knights Errant, Dark Angels, Grey Knights Discussion

[GhostMalone]

Well just to point out that even before the heresy series we knew that there were loyalist elements to the traitors and that they were purged or massacred leaving those that were only loyal to the warmaster.

 

So your right but it's not a big shock.

 

Kol has mentioned it's not about loyalties of the NL

 

It's about the fact that they wouldn't know where to begin with the purge. Even talos & zao shall are still sadistic but they weren't loyal to the emperor.

[Kol Saresk]

Actually my argument is "So far there have been no evidence of loyalist Night Lords." If you want Night Lords who aren't loyal to Curze, I can name them out the wazooh. If you want Night Lords who aren't loyal to the VIII Legion, well I can stretch the definition of that phrase just enough to show more than one example. Granted, none of these are Heresy-era simply because at the moment, none have been shown in the Heresy setting.

 

And having an opinion is fine and dandy. I'm not saying his opinion is wrong. I'm saying why I don't share it and what my opinion is. But somehow that makes me the bad guy for saying "This is my opinion and this is why its different from yours."

 

Now if I sat there an said "no you are wrong." You'd have a good reason for criticizing my stance and my sig like so many have tried. But the reality is, I have yet to say Perrin is actually wrong, just why I don't believe his theories hold that much weight.

[A D-B]

I apologize AD-B. I thought you were supportive of the creativity while not necessarily saying it was a correct theory. IIRC people were browbeating the person who presented the theory. I thought you more or less came out saying its as valid as any other theory regarding Sevatar albeit unlikely. My mistake.

That's what I was trying to be. I'm explaining myself horrendously lately. It's definitely as valid as any other theory.

[GhostMalone]

I apologize AD-B. I thought you were supportive of the creativity while not necessarily saying it was a correct theory. IIRC people were browbeating the person who presented the theory. I thought you more or less came out saying its as valid as any other theory regarding Sevatar albeit unlikely. My mistake.

That's what I was trying to be. I'm explaining myself horrendously lately. It's definitely as valid as any other theory.

I wouldn't say it's your explanation, it's the internet as a medium that always causes mis understandings.

One day I'll meet you at a event and pick your brain

[Kol Saresk]

Actually, I do have one amendment to make to my previous statement. IIRC, there was talk in Prince of Crows of the possibility that some of the smaller fleets had ceased communication with the main Legion and Massacre does suggest evidence of the fractures that would one day run rampant through the Legion. So there is groundwork to say that there are Heresy-era Night Lords who are not loyal to the Legion.

 

I still stand by my statement that personally, I know of no evidence for a Loyalist Night Lord. And at the moment, the only Night Lord I can think of that would make a good teacher, isn't John Wayne Gacy psychotic and isn't a few bats short of a belfry is Malcharion. But as I said before, he is an impossible candidate since we already know what happens to him.

 

At the moment, I do fully understand the reasoning behind Perrin's theory. I see the connections he is drawing. However, at the moment I just feel they are to tenuous and that a stronger argument can be made against rather than for.

 

But like any opinion, mine is subject to change provided even the smallest hint of just a loyalist Night Lord is provided. It could just be a faceless, colorless Astartes who just says something in passing that one recognizes as Nostraman. Or even thinks is Nostraman. It could be someone with pale skin with an eagle-winged skull for heraldry.

 

But as I said, to me, personally, a "K" sound where there is normally a "Ch", a halberd, and that Astartes look for recruits with controllable psychosis jus isn't a strong enough argument when we have phonetic perversion across the board, at least two Legions that are identified with halberds and the suggested Legion known for having a large amount of uncontrollable psychosis. Not to mention its pretty much considered to be one of like three Legions that turned without any recorded purge in even the smallest degree. That I am aware of.

[Perrin]

Actually, I do have one amendment to make to my previous statement. IIRC, there was talk in Prince of Crows of the possibility that some of the smaller fleets had ceased communication with the main Legion and Massacre does suggest evidence of the fractures that would one day run rampant through the Legion. So there is groundwork to say that there are Heresy-era Night Lords who are not loyal to the Legion.

 

I still stand by my statement that personally, I know of no evidence for a Loyalist Night Lord. And at the moment, the only Night Lord I can think of that would make a good teacher, isn't John Wayne Gacy psychotic and isn't a few bats short of a belfry is Malcharion. But as I said before, he is an impossible candidate since we already know what happens to him.

 

At the moment, I do fully understand the reasoning behind Perrin's theory. I see the connections he is drawing. However, at the moment I just feel they are to tenuous and that a stronger argument can be made against rather than for.

 

But like any opinion, mine is subject to change provided even the smallest hint of just a loyalist Night Lord is provided. It could just be a faceless, colorless Astartes who just says something in passing that one recognizes as Nostraman. Or even thinks is Nostraman. It could be someone with pale skin with an eagle-winged skull for heraldry.

 

But as I said, to me, personally, a "K" sound where there is normally a "Ch", a halberd, and that Astartes look for recruits with controllable psychosis jus isn't a strong enough argument when we have phonetic perversion across the board, at least two Legions that are identified with halberds and the suggested Legion known for having a large amount of uncontrollable psychosis. Not to mention its pretty much considered to be one of like three Legions that turned without any recorded purge in even the smallest degree. That I am aware of.

 

That's fair enough. I've never argued that any of the evidence I've put forward is adamant, but I believed that there was enough there to make it at least possible. All of your replies have been reasonable and backed up by evidence I would like to add.

 

The one thing I would add is that IIRC a recently published timeline put the NL going rogue a decade or two before the Heresy, which surprised me at the time. I'd imagine that anyone who didn't agree with going rogue and disobeying the Emperor/Imperium would have had an "accident" fairly quickly, leaving the Legion full of marines loyal only to Curze, the Legion or themselves just in time for the Heresy. To start with the theme/personality of the Night Lords doesn't make for the most loyal Legion anyway, so I doubt there were many who spoke out.

 

Also just to clarify, the point about astartes recruiting aspirants with psychopathic tendencies wasn't a point I used as evidence, it was a counter-point made by someone else saying a NL couldn't be a GK because they're psychopaths, to which I responded with evidence showing that although the NL are worse, all Legions/Chapters recruit aspirants with some level of psychopathic tendencies.

[Aralon56]

Does anyone else think it could have been Astelan that changed places with Epithemus.

 

[Kol Saresk]

Fair enough. I didn't realize that as I was skipping over the more obnoxious replies to your theories. And I do believe your theory has some ground to stand, just not solid ground in my opinion.

 

And yeah, an official timeline hadn't been given for the destruction of Nostramo since Second Edition I believe. IIRC the Index Astartes correctly, it says Nostramo was destroyed and the Night Lords were called back to Terra but they refused and the Heresy broke out before anyone could do anything. So it gives the impression of a rapid progression of events. Not that the VIII spent twenty years as fugitives while "dispensing Imperial Justice". Then again, the IA articles were written by Imperials and who would want to admit they lost track of a whole Legion? ;)

[Frosco Toppings]

It seems to me that every time a POV character survives to the end of a heresy novel everyone's all "Ooooh he's destined to be a grey knight".

[Kol Saresk]

Well, the theory that Sevatar might become a Grey Knight was first put forth well before he became a POV character.

[Lord Marshal Ragnrok]

Shenanigans.

 

Very well, we shall continue. 

 

I'm all for debate, and the give and take that goes along with that. That's not what happened when Perrin presented a theory, a theory that he thought could be possible, and presented evidence for both sides of the argument. It was dismissed as ludicrous (yeah I know that exact wording was in response to another poster, but that poster was putting forth the same theory, and the general theme of the responses to Perrin were the same). Some went so far as to attack his canon evidence, as if that evidence was somehow less than the canon they used to support their own arguments (which goes back to the whole nothing is true, everything is permitted thing). 

 

It's funny, because your argument for Night Lords not turning is literally "because I want to see it this way." Even when presented with evidence of other traitor legions, once considered wholly corrupted, also having loyalists, the overwhelming response was NEevaAAARRRR!!!. Before the HH series, who would have thought the World Eaters, or any traitor legion for that matter, would have loyalist elements? Why should the Night Lords be an exception now that it has been shown that not every single Marine in the chaos legions turned to the dark side? Every argument you make for your position could have been made for the other legions before BL created their loyalists hold outs. The truth is you can't say it won't happen. Every thing you point to can be blown away by 'Hurricane BL' tomorrow morning. Canon isn't canon. 

 

It should be noted that I'm not arguing for or against a particular theory.  I'm not saying you have to agree with Perrin, or ANY poster who puts forth a theory. It's all theoretical and make believe, and the 40K universe will be different from one person to the next. I just thought it was unfair how some members of the forum climbed up on their high fluff horse to beat down another forum member. 

 

Also, that first line in your sig gave me all the lols the internet has to offer.

 

as Kol said, the problem with the NL is a lack of evidence supporting possibilities of loyalists.  right now, there is next to nothing even remotely useful for that theory.  yes, it is possible just like any traitor legion, but the only members who have been presented as possible loyalists were Talos' warband, which were traitors too.  there is just not enough evidence to support it at present.

 

 

Actually, I do have one amendment to make to my previous statement. IIRC, there was talk in Prince of Crows of the possibility that some of the smaller fleets had ceased communication with the main Legion and Massacre does suggest evidence of the fractures that would one day run rampant through the Legion. So there is groundwork to say that there are Heresy-era Night Lords who are not loyal to the Legion.

 

I still stand by my statement that personally, I know of no evidence for a Loyalist Night Lord. And at the moment, the only Night Lord I can think of that would make a good teacher, isn't John Wayne Gacy psychotic and isn't a few bats short of a belfry is Malcharion. But as I said before, he is an impossible candidate since we already know what happens to him.

 

At the moment, I do fully understand the reasoning behind Perrin's theory. I see the connections he is drawing. However, at the moment I just feel they are to tenuous and that a stronger argument can be made against rather than for.

 

But like any opinion, mine is subject to change provided even the smallest hint of just a loyalist Night Lord is provided. It could just be a faceless, colorless Astartes who just says something in passing that one recognizes as Nostraman. Or even thinks is Nostraman. It could be someone with pale skin with an eagle-winged skull for heraldry.

 

But as I said, to me, personally, a "K" sound where there is normally a "Ch", a halberd, and that Astartes look for recruits with controllable psychosis jus isn't a strong enough argument when we have phonetic perversion across the board, at least two Legions that are identified with halberds and the suggested Legion known for having a large amount of uncontrollable psychosis. Not to mention its pretty much considered to be one of like three Legions that turned without any recorded purge in even the smallest degree. That I am aware of.

 

That's fair enough. I've never argued that any of the evidence I've put forward is adamant, but I believed that there was enough there to make it at least possible. All of your replies have been reasonable and backed up by evidence I would like to add.

 

The one thing I would add is that IIRC a recently published timeline put the NL going rogue a decade or two before the Heresy, which surprised me at the time. I'd imagine that anyone who didn't agree with going rogue and disobeying the Emperor/Imperium would have had an "accident" fairly quickly, leaving the Legion full of marines loyal only to Curze, the Legion or themselves just in time for the Heresy. To start with the theme/personality of the Night Lords doesn't make for the most loyal Legion anyway, so I doubt there were many who spoke out.

 

Also just to clarify, the point about astartes recruiting aspirants with psychopathic tendencies wasn't a point I used as evidence, it was a counter-point made by someone else saying a NL couldn't be a GK because they're psychopaths, to which I responded with evidence showing that although the NL are worse, all Legions/Chapters recruit aspirants with some level of psychopathic tendencies.

 

regarding rogue NL pre HH, i would not pretend to know the reasons for it, but i would imagine that Cruze would not tolerate it and Sev at the least or Cruze himself, would wipe them out.

 

 

Does anyone else think it could have been Astelan that changed places with Epithemus.

 

 

could not be him. he is confirmed as a true Fallen and captured by a Int Chap whose name i cant remember.  he told them his role and repented before execution.

[Augustus]

Interesting Aralon, however, I got the impression that he switched with another Grand Master.

[Aralon56]

 

 

Does anyone else think it could have been Astelan that changed places with Epithemus.

 

could not be him. he is confirmed as a true Fallen and captured by a Int Chap whose name i cant remember.  he told them his role and repented before execution.

It was Chaplain Boreas and he was never executed he was taken down into the rock and imprisoned next to luther iirc and i'm quite certain he didn't repent (ill have to read the book again). 

[Aralon56]

Interesting Aralon, however, I got the impression that he switched with another Grand Master.

 

This is what lead me to think it might have been Astelan.

'But I do know which true name belongs to you, Daemon. I knew it before you let slip that you turned half a legion.' The lord of change's expression becomes one of puzzlement and doubt. 'I know who you are, daemon, because I recognised you.' The grey knight lowered a portion of his psychic defences, not enough to allow the daemon full access to his mind, but enough to share information he needed to.The lord of change relinquished its grip on Epimetheus and backed away. 'No! It cannot be. You! The one who defied me, who very nearly unravelled everything. You're not even suppose to be in this time.    

 

To me this gave me the impression Epimetheus had met the deamon when he was a dark angel and Zahariel is running around trying to save caliban. So then i got thinking it could be Astelan because even though he is considered a fallen he is still very loyal to the emperor and at the end of the BL book the chaplain agreed with Astelan.

[Lord Marshal Ragnrok]

that is not good reasoning. that opens it up to thousands of possibilities.  it does not point to anyone in particular save maybe librarians.  now it would interesting to see if a situation involving a lord of change and the DA comes up in the HH series.

[Kol Saresk]

@The Lord Marshal: In Massacre, there is mention that the 90,000-120,000 Night Lords who were at Istvaan were not the totality of the VIII and there was an unconfirmed number of minor fleets of unknown strength running rampant through the Eastern Fringe already.

 

And in Prince of Crows there is mention several minor fleets ceasing contact but it was unknown if they had been destroyed in the ambush at Sheol, caught in a separate ambush or had decided to just go quiet. Since the third was a possibility, that would almost suggest that at least one fleet had already gone quiet.

 

As I said, we can find Night Lords out the wazooh who are disloyal to either Curze or the command structure of the VIII Legion(read as "disloyal to the VIII Legion" for alignment with my earlier statements). We just haven't been shown any who were/are loyal or have had thoughts about remaining/becoming loyal.

 

The comment about the Purge was that Curze saw very little of VIII Legion as being loyal to him. The loyalties went all over the place from a squad to its sergeant, from a company to its captain etc. That said, I'd feel sorry for any Night Lord who possessed loyalty to the Emperor.

[Wade Garrett]

To be fair, it would probably be difficult to tell a Night Lord splinter force preying on undefended Traitor worlds and supply ships out of loyalty to the Emperor from one doing the same thing because "WHEEE! Raiding and murdering is the most funnest thing ever!"

[Conn Eremon]

Here's a crazy theory:

 

Kol is right about his theory on Sevatar's sin. He is tasked to prevent Corax's escape and Corax escapes.

 

But not because he failed to prevent Corax's escape.

 

Because he let him escape.

 

Sevatar's sin? Retaining his loyalty to the Emperor, in spite of his attempts to keep up appearances throughout the Heresy.

 

 

 

 

As an aside, I despise auto-correct's constant sneakiness in changing Sevatar to Webster.

[Wade Garrett]

So...that big "Let's blow

Invincible Reason out of space" in Prince of Crows, that only failed because Night Haunter woke up and decided to go walkabout, that was because. ..Sevatar knew Lion and the Dark Angels are really the tenth traitor Legion?

:p

[Kol Saresk]

Cormac, you are an evil evil evil person for perverting my words. Henceforth, you shall be known as Darth... Erebus!

[Bryan Blaire]

To me this gave me the impression Epimetheus had met the deamon when he was a dark angel and Zahariel is running around trying to save caliban. So then i got thinking it could be Astelan because even though he is considered a fallen he is still very loyal to the emperor and at the end of the BL book the chaplain agreed with Astelan.

Astelan is neither loyal nor did Boreas fully agree with him. Boreas agreed that the Dark Angels had lost their way from being "true" Marines, but Astelan's doings give the lie to his words. Check out the Ravenwing novel to see what Astelan had really been up to/a part of. It isn't pretty nor does it display any noble actions like he was claiming.

 

However, that statement by the Lord of Change is making me rethink my opposition to Zahariel. He's really the only named Librarian we have that was on Caliban directly defying the demon there. If Cypher has the ability to "step around" the Warp for transport purposes (something like a mobile Webway entrance?), then I guess maybe Zahariel really did leave Caliban early.

 

that is not good reasoning. that opens it up to thousands of possibilities.  it does not point to anyone in particular save maybe librarians.  now it would interesting to see if a situation involving a lord of change and the DA comes up in the HH series.

It already has, a Lord of Change speaks directly to the Lion in "The Lion" by Gav Thorpe in the Primarchs anthology. The creature's psychic voice is familiar to the Lion, and it tells the Lion that it has come to him before (and the only place that really could have happened would have been Caliban). He has vague recollections of pleading and entreaty, something that is possibly similar to how Tzeentch captured Magnus in his trap. The Lion then destroys the "body" of the demon by unleashing something that seems like a force blast down a normal sword, similar to how a Librarian would with a force weapon.

 

Additionally, the name of the demon that is trying to be released from Caliban is Oroborous. The oroborous is the chosen symbol of the Thousands Sons post-Heresy after they have given over to Tzeentch, and the oroborous is an old occult symbol, it's biggest meaning is eternal change.

 

I don't think any of this is coincidence, Tzeentch had been trying to ensnare the Lion and through him, eventually his followers, after all, Tzeentch supposedly reads the full future and plays the long game, but somehow didn't see that the Lion wouldn't "care" like Magnus did.

[Lord Marshal Ragnrok]

So...that big "Let's blow

Invincible Reason out of space" in Prince of Crows, that only failed because Night Haunter woke up and decided to go walkabout, that was because. ..Sevatar knew Lion and the Dark Angels are really the tenth traitor Legion?

HERETIC!! REPORT TO CHAPLAIN Asmodai!!

Cormac, you are an evil evil evil person for perverting my words. Henceforth, you shall be known as Darth... Erebus!

Darth Erebus? *facepalm* well i suppose you could have thought up something worse.

[Lord Marshal Ragnrok]

 

To me this gave me the impression Epimetheus had met the deamon when he was a dark angel and Zahariel is running around trying to save caliban. So then i got thinking it could be Astelan because even though he is considered a fallen he is still very loyal to the emperor and at the end of the BL book the chaplain agreed with Astelan.

Astelan is neither loyal nor did Boreas fully agree with him. Boreas agreed that the Dark Angels had lost their way from being "true" Marines, but Astelan's doings give the lie to his words. Check out the Ravenwing novel to see what Astelan had really been up to/a part of. It isn't pretty nor does it display any noble actions like he was claiming.

 

However, that statement by the Lord of Change is making me rethink my opposition to Zahariel. He's really the only named Librarian we have that was on Caliban directly defying the demon there. If Cypher has the ability to "step around" the Warp for transport purposes (something like a mobile Webway entrance?), then I guess maybe Zahariel really did leave Caliban early.

 

except that as far as we know, he should have been on Caliban for the confrontation.  also, while he kinda disappeared after, Isfrael was also sent to Caliban (i know i misspelled that).

[GhostMalone]

Wasn't he killed....

[Perrin]

Israfael is dead. The GK in Pandorax says something like another Dark Angel with a sacred sword had taken that path in his stead, which in 40k would be Cypher. Although I don't why Cypher would have the Lion Sword before the Fall, unless it was left on Caliban, I believe that Cypher helped him leave Caliban through some warp ritual, like Erebus and his disciples use, in order to bring word to the Emperor/Lion about Caliban's fall.

 

Going on the extract of GK v Daemon posted above I don't think there is much doubt that Epimetheus is Zahariel.