Abnett's Rout vs. King's Space Vikings

[Dantay VI]

Yep, those Bernard Cornwell books ae great, I have all of them in my ereader and I have read them twice atleast.

 

I also enjoyed Conn Iguilddens (I think hat is how you spell it) series of books, around Genghis Khan (Conqueror series I think it is called)

[Týr]

 

 

Hasn't there been a fairly recent re-examination of Viking history among scholarly circles? The common consensus seems to be that their level of sophistication completely flies in the face of the pop culture stereotype: mead-swilling raiders who go around beating and pillaging and not much else. The Vikings were in fact excellent ship-builders, craftsmen, explorers, poets etc. 

 

 

As far as I know here in Denmark that has been the common consensus for the last 20-30 years. I have always been taught that vikings were skilled tradesmen, fantastic ships builders and so on.

 

On topic: What I think have always been said by others better than I could ever formulate it.

 

I prefer the modern interpretations of the wolves more than the old ones. My view on Russ and the wolves is the one shared with A-D-B that Russ is the caring brother. But there must still be room for him to be written otherwise. After all he is a Primarch so he can easily have very different aspects to him depending on who he is with/who it is describing him without there being any inconsistencies

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Yep, those Bernard Cornwell books ae great, I have all of them in my ereader and I have read them twice atleast.

 

I also enjoyed Conn Iguilddens (I think hat is how you spell it) series of books, around Genghis Khan (Conqueror series I think it is called)

 

That's because historical fiction of that ilk is awesome. Try Christian Cameron too!

[Balthamal]

 

 

 

Hasn't there been a fairly recent re-examination of Viking history among scholarly circles? The common consensus seems to be that their level of sophistication completely flies in the face of the pop culture stereotype: mead-swilling raiders who go around beating and pillaging and not much else. The Vikings were in fact excellent ship-builders, craftsmen, explorers, poets etc. 

 

 

As far as I know here in Denmark that has been the common consensus for the last 20-30 years. I have always been taught that vikings were skilled tradesmen, fantastic ships builders and so on.

 

On topic: What I think have always been said by others better than I could ever formulate it.

 

I prefer the modern interpretations of the wolves more than the old ones. My view on Russ and the wolves is the one shared with A-D-B that Russ is the caring brother. But there must still be room for him to be written otherwise. After all he is a Primarch so he can easily have very different aspects to him depending on who he is with/who it is describing him without there being any inconsistencies

 

 

I agree completely, especially on the point of the ship building and sea-craft. Hell of a difference between sailing the Mediterranean and sailing the North Sea. At the same time I'm also glad that the whole culture hasn't been "cut and paste" onto the wolves wholesale. They benefit more by having other influences, especially germanic/celtic shamanism/druidism.

 

Back on track. Russ, and to a certain extent all the Primarchs, tend to convey different aspects of their characters depending on their company. Russ acts like a tribal king amongst his Legion because that's how the majority of them were raised in Fenrisian culture, this is back in the days before neophytes were dosed up on hypnotherapy to get them in line with everyone else. Then amongst what you could call "high brow" company he acts like warlord he is whilst with his brothers he shows almost a "big brother" attitude towards them. Even Magnus, the one he dislikes the most (hate is too strong a word), even when he is on his way to gut his world and Legion, he still makes the attempt to talk him down, because you know, big brothers do that kinda thing.

 

Think it's this overall that leads me to prefer the newer material. There's depth and a far more plausible motivations for the actions of the characters. You can clearly see how one might transition into the other but the defining feature for me is the potential growth of the characters involved. In King's books it feels very linear and blatant whilst the Vlka Fenryka have a potential to grow in interested and less obvious ways - Night of the Wolf, who saw that coming?

[Stonerhino]

 

 

way back in the 2nd Ed SW codex, all the different entries basically came with a +1 WS compared to their counterparts in other chapters to represent their close combat abilities

 

I'm guessing this stopped with third edition? 

 

It actually started in the army list that was the companion to codex Imperilis.  There is a note that says something along the lines of "Space Wolves have a preference for melee combat and thus have +1 WS".  The Space Wolves however took a beating with a nerf bat in 3rd.  Instead of the +1 WS they got counter charge.  It was one of the few changes that actually made fluffy sence. 

 

I would also argue that the idea of "Marines +1" extends well into their fluff as well.  I enjoy when it is the little things that show why they would have that in-universe image.  Like when the Watch pack in TUR disobeys the order to join the search for Cruize.  Might be when Guilliman gets the idea of having a small side force that is completely "Different" is a good thing.  Then explains why latter when Russ refuzes the Codex Astartes Guilliman lets him but was close to fighting Dorn over it.

In Hunter's Moon the story teller makes several references to the Wolf being a sailor/seaman.

[b1soul]

 

 

My view on Russ and the wolves is the one shared with A-D-B that Russ is the caring brother. But there must still be room for him to be written otherwise. 

 

Yeah, a primarch (or any character) isn't bound to one quality. Russ might be "caring" but I'm pretty sure there's a limit to his brotherly concern. If a brother goes too far in his eyes, he won't hesitate to let the axe fall...or Russ might simply not be in a caring mood sometimes. After all, let's not forget tht there's an element of randomness or caprice in anyone's personality. 

 

A certain degree of inconsistency results in character complexity. What I don't like is character confusion...when an authour seems to writing a drastically different character without explanation. 

[Grimtooth]

I read a lot of Howard, and I love the Conan stories. They're far, far from the shallow drek a lot of people take them for (see: Arnie's movies, and the new movie), and what barbarism comes down to above all else is honesty. The Russ I love most speaks his mind, does what he thinks is right, and is honest unto death. His Wolves are the same.

"What do I know of cultured ways; the gilt, the craft, and the lie?

I who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky.

The subtle tongue, the sophist guile; they fail when the broadswords sing,

Rush in and die, dogs. I was a man before I was a king."

-- The Phoenix on the Swor

You see it in Slaine, as well as Howard's Conan. Barbarism isn't stupidity, it's honesty, it's vitality, it's purity. It's the dynamism of honesty against the weaknesses of artificial social structures that raise unworthy, weak men to positions of power. That's why Conan's reign in Aquilonia revitalises the nation - not because he's a badass, but because he brings a level of straightforward intelligence and integrity to a position usually so devoid of it.

I love me some Howard. There is depth to his Conan stories, that's for sure. "Barbarian" to Howard is more of compliment than an insult.

Hasn't there been a fairly recent re-examination of Viking history among scholarly circles? The common consensus seems to be that their level of sophistication completely flies in the face of the pop culture stereotype: mead-swilling raiders who go around beating and pillaging and not much else. The Vikings were in fact excellent ship-builders, craftsmen, explorers, poets etc.

The same could be said of other "barbarian" peoples. Take the Mongols for example. The common misconception is that the Mongol army was a wild, bloodthirsty horde, overwhelming enemies with superior numbers. The truth is that Mongol military discipline was light years ahead of its time, comparable to 19th century European armies. Mongol forces were usually outnumbered by their enemies defending their home turf. The Mongols won victory after victory with superior discipline, organisation, tactics, and technology. The Pax Mongolica facilitated trade of goods and ideas between East and West.

I'm not sure about Vikings, but I know the Mongols viewed sedentary civilisation and its luxury and intrigues as a disease that would rob a warrior people of its strength. Vikings probably had the same views of Christendom.

Man, we don't just agree, we're on the exact same page.

I read a lot of Howard, and I love the Conan stories. They're far, far from the shallow drek a lot of people take them for (see: Arnie's movies, and the new movie), and what barbarism comes down to above all else is honesty. The Russ I love most speaks his mind, does what he thinks is right, and is honest unto death. His Wolves are the same.

"What do I know of cultured ways; the gilt, the craft, and the lie?

I who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky.

The subtle tongue, the sophist guile; they fail when the broadswords sing,

Rush in and die, dogs. I was a man before I was a king."

-- The Phoenix on the Swor

You see it in Slaine, as well as Howard's Conan. Barbarism isn't stupidity, it's honesty, it's vitality, it's purity. It's the dynamism of honesty against the weaknesses of artificial social structures that raise unworthy, weak men to positions of power. That's why Conan's reign in Aquilonia revitalises the nation - not because he's a badass, but because he brings a level of straightforward intelligence and integrity to a position usually so devoid of it.

I love me some Howard. There is depth to his Conan stories, that's for sure. "Barbarian" to Howard is more of compliment than an insult.

Hasn't there been a fairly recent re-examination of Viking history among scholarly circles? The common consensus seems to be that their level of sophistication completely flies in the face of the pop culture stereotype: mead-swilling raiders who go around beating and pillaging and not much else. The Vikings were in fact excellent ship-builders, craftsmen, explorers, poets etc.

The same could be said of other "barbarian" peoples. Take the Mongols for example. The common misconception is that the Mongol army was a wild, bloodthirsty horde, overwhelming enemies with superior numbers. The truth is that Mongol military discipline was light years ahead of its time, comparable to 19th century European armies. Mongol forces were usually outnumbered by their enemies defending their home turf. The Mongols won victory after victory with superior discipline, organisation, tactics, and technology. The Pax Mongolica facilitated trade of goods and ideas between East and West.

I'm not sure about Vikings, but I know the Mongols viewed sedentary civilisation and its luxury and intrigues as a disease that would rob a warrior people of its strength. Vikings probably had the same views of Christendom.

Man, we don't just agree, we're on the exact same page.

Get a room you two!!

[Lexington]

Does anyone prefer King's Wolves to Abnett's?

Me! Well, with a pretty severe caveat.

 

There's a tendency within 40K fandom to view King's contribution to the Wolves exclusively from the angle of his Ragnar novels, but I think that's a mistake. Bill King’s Space Wolves, to me, are found in the White Dwarf article that birthed the Chapter, and in those amazing vignettes from the 2nd Ed Wolves Codex. The ones that read like this:

 

“In turn Ulrik lit each of the pyres till at last all of the bodies were consumed by the cleansing flame. As sergeant Hakon’s last bed caught, Ragnar threw back his head and howled, giving voice in one long lonely cry to all his grief and fury and pent-up emotion. One by one all the Space Marines round the fire did the same till their cries merged into a giant animal roar that drifted upwards to the cold, unblinking stars.”

 

Those are the Wolves I love, the ones whose wholehearted embrace of life is balanced by the burning knowledge that they’ll all find their death on some far-flung battlefield. The ones who know the end is coming, and shout their defiance into the void.

 

The Abnett/Prospero Burns interpretation is...well, it is what it is. Abnett’s a gob-smackingly superb writer, but his tendency to re-architect 40K’s fundamentals to suit his particular vision of the world often bugs me, especially when it comes to Space Marines, which he just seems to plain-out not like. His version of the Wolves is too concerned with injecting real history into a fictional concept, too busy fetishizing jargon (“Murder-make!” “Vlka Fenryka!” Bleh), too remote and cerebral for such a hot-blooded, human Chapter, at least for my tastes.

[b1soul]

“In turn Ulrik lit each of the pyres till at last all of the bodies were consumed by the cleansing flame. As sergeant Hakon’s last bed caught, Ragnar threw back his head and howled, giving voice in one long lonely cry to all his grief and fury and pent-up emotion. One by one all the Space Marines round the fire did the same till their cries merged into a giant animal roar that drifted upwards to the cold, unblinking stars.”

 

I think the above is decent writing, not anything spectacular...but that's just my taste. 

 

I don't see why Abnett's Wolves would not light pyres and howl for fallen comrades. It wouldn't be out of character for them. 

 

The difference between Abnett's Wolves and King's Wolves is really the tone I think. King incorporates more humour and the typical Viking stereotypes of drunkenness and boisterous, devil-may-care attitude.

 

Abnett makes them more serious, calculating, and cunning. 

[Wade Garrett]

I don't see why Abnett's Wolves would not light pyres and WET LEOPARD GROWL for fallen comrades. It wouldn't be out of character for them.

 

Fixed that for you.

[b1soul]

 

I don't see why Abnett's Wolves would not light pyres and WET LEOPARD GROWL for fallen comrades. It wouldn't be out of character for them.

Fixed that for you.

 

 

I'd prefer wet leopard meow 

[Dantay VI]

For me I just felt that Abnett was light years ahead of Bill King when it came to portraying a believable portrayal of what the Space Wolves could be like.

 

I am not sure what it is about his writing, but he has a way of making you feel connected to the characters of his books and make them believable to me (Gaunts Ghosts for example). Also he doesn't seem to be scared to kill off major characters or put in twists along the way which could be so much a part of real life.

 

He also makes the characters have more than one dimension, so you don't pigeon-hole them either.

 

Bearing in mind that Prospero Burns is being told to us as a saga, from Kasper Hawser, a mortal human who has been allowed into the rout, not an actual Space Wolf. So things like wet leopard growl, are excusable in this case as it may be the only way a mortal can express how it sounded to him.And its a story for the Wolves themselves, we are just there to hear it like an observer. Or maybe I just mis-read the book.

 

Bill King's stories are the memories of Ragnar Blackmane and told from a Space Wolf's perspective. Rather than a saga, its like a blockbuster movie... There is a bit of a story, but its fairly direct with big bangs and explosions and the hero walks out at the other end after being pushed to the brink!

 

As a side-note, the stereotypical space viking, eating, drinking, farting and killing isn't my cup of tea. Neither do I believe that the real vikings were like that either. They were so more sophisticated. Its why I have started swapping out most of the Wolves weapons for Dwarven axes etc, because I also want to show that they are a more sophisticated society than others would believe. 

 

Besides Vikings weren't a people, viking means raider, they were, Norse, Swedes, Rus, Danes and more than their adopted name would suggest.

[Frosco Toppings]

I also much prefer Abnett's portrayal. Fans of Prospero Burns, historical fiction and hairy north men in general  might also like Robert Low's Whale Road books.

[Iron Hands Fanatic]

 

I read a lot of Howard, and I love the Conan stories. They're far, far from the shallow drek a lot of people take them for (see: Arnie's movies, and the new movie), and what barbarism comes down to above all else is honesty. The Russ I love most speaks his mind, does what he thinks is right, and is honest unto death. His Wolves are the same.

 

"What do I know of cultured ways; the gilt, the craft, and the lie?

I who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky.

The subtle tongue, the sophist guile; they fail when the broadswords sing,

Rush in and die, dogs. I was a man before I was a king."

 

-- The Phoenix on the Swor

 

You see it in Slaine, as well as Howard's Conan. Barbarism isn't stupidity, it's honesty, it's vitality, it's purity. It's the dynamism of honesty against the weaknesses of artificial social structures that raise unworthy, weak men to positions of power. That's why Conan's reign in Aquilonia revitalises the nation - not because he's a badass, but because he brings a level of straightforward intelligence and integrity to a position usually so devoid of it.

 

I love me some Howard. There is depth to his Conan stories, that's for sure. "Barbarian" to Howard is more of compliment than an insult. 

 

Hasn't there been a fairly recent re-examination of Viking history among scholarly circles? The common consensus seems to be that their level of sophistication completely flies in the face of the pop culture stereotype: mead-swilling raiders who go around beating and pillaging and not much else. The Vikings were in fact excellent ship-builders, craftsmen, explorers, poets etc. 

 

The same could be said of other "barbarian" peoples. Take the Mongols for example. The common misconception is that the Mongol army was a wild, bloodthirsty horde, overwhelming enemies with superior numbers. The truth is that Mongol military discipline was light years ahead of its time, comparable to 19th century European armies. Mongol forces were usually outnumbered by enemies defending their home turf. The Mongols won victory after victory with superior discipline, organisation, tactics, and technology. The Pax Mongolica facilitated trade of goods and ideas between East and West etc.    

 

I'm not sure about Vikings, but I know the Mongols viewed sedentary civilisation and all of its trappings and intrigues as a disease that would rob a warrior people of its strength. Vikings probably had the same views of Christian civilisation which preached the virtue of meekness

 

 

Heh, sounds remarkably like the Xth Legion. Didn't exactly expect to see that many parallels between the Space Wolves and the Iron Hands. Although, admittedly both come from equally hostile worlds, albeit in extremely different ways - whilst one faces extreme cold & merciless predators, the other is a toxic wasteland haunted by the mechanical horrors of the Dark Age of technolgy.

 

It's interesting to consider that the two Legions may have similar core views, but taken to very different extremes. I wonder if it was Ferrus' particular brand of Darwinism that resulted in the potential animosity between the Legions [this is based entirely in their status in the Legion allies chart in FW's Betrayal] 

[Carach]

Does anyone prefer King's Wolves to Abnett's? 

 

I didn't like Prospero Burns at first...but I'm starting to appreciate more and more what Abnett has done for the sixth legion. No disrespect to King but I by far prefer the Vlka Fenryka [the Folk of Fenris?] to happy-go-lucky alcohol-guzzling Space Vikings.   

 

No, I am not a fan of SW exceptionalism, but apart from the in-universe suggestions of exceptionalism, Prospero Burns is one of the best legion-building novels of series (I suppose in the case of Prospero Burns, it's legion-renovating)     

i didnt like prospero burns at first either, but have read through it again recently and actually decided i like it a lot. makes the wolves a lot less mindlessly hateful and idiotic than a thousand sons does, and couple of other books...

 

Was quite strange really because when a thousand sons first came out i loved it, having read that again also i found that i didn't so much.

[Armond]

All this discussion on culture and such has me interested in White Scars, and is greatly affecting my decision to go BA. Yes yes I know this is a thread about Space Wolves, but I just had to say it.

 

Also I love me some Howard as well.

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

I find them Wolves of Kings to be aimed at teenagers, while the small glimpse of Abnett's Rout to be more realistic (i know how that sounds, just go with it)

 

WLK

[Tyrannicide]

I started Prospero Burns a couple months back. Read the first few chapters but have made excuses as to why I haven't started back up again. It's not for a lack of interest. To be completely honest I'm terrified. If I return to it, I'll surely start that Heresy-era Wolves army that I fantasize about at night.

[b1soul]

All this discussion on culture and such has me interested in White Scars, and is greatly affecting my decision to go BA. 

 

Would love to see a skilled authour develop the BA. James Swallow just doesn't do it for me. There was almost no legion-building in Fear to Tread. The BA came across as bland, vanilla marines in red power armour who get angry sometimes. 

 

In Betrayer, ADB gives us glimpses of Angron's past. He even revisits Nuceria (and it didn't feel forced or anything like that). Angron's character received a good deal of exploration. Swallow really dropped the ball. Neither Sang nor any of the BA characters was memorable.

 

As for the Scars, Wraight has done an excellent job with them. Let's say, they're not just Mongols in space. I'm quite confident when I say that as I'm quite familiar with historical Mongols and stereotypes of the Mongols. The Scars are really an Asiatic amalgam if your will. Mongols are the foundation, but I detect Chinese, Japanese, and Tibetan influences as well...along with Wraight's own touches. The end product is a very unique legion.

 

 

i didnt like prospero burns at first either, but have read through it again recently and actually decided i like it a lot. makes the wolves a lot less mindlessly hateful and idiotic than a thousand sons does, and couple of other books...

 

There's an element of hypocrisy to the Wolves in both ATS and PB. I both novel, the Wolves are against the TSons use of psychic powers while giving themselves a free pass. In ATS, the Wolves just come across as douchebags because you're getting everything from the TSons' perspective. You don't really get a glimpse into how the Wolves think

 

From the perspective of the Wolves, the TSons are arrogant and overconfident in their ability to master the Warp. The TSons are misguided and easily deceived by Chaos because of their thirst for knowledge and belief that they are able to control the powers of the Warp 

[Dantay VI]

@ Darth Potato.... Do it..... You know you want to... It's why I have sprayed all my terminators a different shade of grey :) Just so I can use them in both 30 & 40K universes...

[Terrahawk]

Hear hear! The BA community has been hoping for years for someone other than Swallow to write some BA fiction. I'm inclined to believe that he has some dirt on Black Library executives, because no one else is let anywhere near the Angels. Fear to Tread wasn't necessarily a bad book (which was a nice change of pace from his BA series...), but definitely a missed opportunity. Like b1soul said, the book did almost nothing to characterize the Blood Angels Legion. I'm just praying to the Emperor that one day one of the BL heavy weights gets to write them, as I understand that's number one thing currently on a lot of the writers' wish list.

And to stay on topic, I prefer the Vlka Fenryka with a decend amount of previous material thrown in.

[ShadowMaster]

ADB's and Cris Wraigt's Wolves are the best!

[Hyaenidae]

I'm just utterly psyched to see what FW does with the Wolves. I see a horde of new SW fans in the near future....

[b1soul]

I'm just utterly psyched to see what FW does with the Wolves. I see a horde of new SW fans in the near future....

 

As if there weren't enough already...

[Balthamal]

I'm just utterly psyched to see what FW does with the Wolves. I see a horde of new SW fans in the near future....

 

Given FW deliberately scrubbed the planned release schedule to ensure they did everything in Inferno justice, I'd say the bar is going to be set extremely high to say the least. Given what else will be included in that book I'll take an early punt and say that it's going to be the best volume in the whole series bar the siege of Terra