The Talon Of Horus

[Loesh]

Yeah, but still doesn't mean he is any less at their mercy.

 

 

[Meme]*doesn't matter, had victory*[/meme]

 

A victory not won is no victory at all.

 

.....Come to think of it, it actually does kind of sound a little Sue-ish.

 

"You only one because I let you win." *Smugness intensifies*

[Conn Eremon]

Yeah, but we still won, and you're still an eyeless prisoner spilling secrets, to be sacrificed upon the altar of the God-Emperor on the eve of His final victory over the anti-Emperor, Abaddon.

 

And we could care less if you chose to walk willingly to your place of execution, or that you foolishly thought yourself powerful enough to get out alive.

 

We have more important threats that demand our attention, anyways

[Loesh]

Yeah, but we still won, and you're still an eyeless prisoner spilling secrets, to be sacrificed upon the altar of the God-Emperor on the eve of His final victory over the anti-Emperor, Abaddon.

 

And we could care less if you chose to walk willingly to your place of execution, or that you foolishly thought yourself powerful enough to get out alive.

 

We have more important threats that demand our attention, anyways

 

But if it's all according to the plan, whatever the inquisition thinks of it, that doesn't impact how much or how less of a Mary Sue *Khayon* is or is not.

 

 

Granted this could just be my observations being colored by a combination of tiredness this late at night, and after some deep thought a final verdict that I didn't really like the Black Legion that much in it's current incarnation.

[Conn Eremon]

I'm going to be perfectly honest. I tend to disregard most claims that a character is mary sue. Not because I think such characters don't exist, because they very much do, but more because the vast majority of claims are frankly bull. This guy did something grand, and I didn't like it. Mary sue. I mean, head down into the Black Templars subforum, and you'll see complaints that Abaddon is mary sue simply on the principle that he kills Sigismund. Abaddon is mary sue, because he isn't letting Sigismund be mary sue.

 

It's laughable, and I have just grown used to ignoring it.

[Loesh]

*Shrug* Fair enough, and much like Hipster the term Mary Sue has lost all meaning to the mainstream.
 
Really whether or not Khayon is a Mary Sue is a moot argument to me, as I try to look at things from the more academic and broader scope of does this character negatively impact the setting? Which, to my knowledge Khayon does not. He adds to it in places in fact, the parts that can be construed as negative largely are from the things around him.

 

 

That said, I think he suffered remarkably little consequence for losing control of the Ragged Knight.

 

[Prodigal Son of Magnus]

I'm going to be perfectly honest. I tend to disregard most claims that a character is mary sue. Not because I think such characters don't exist, because they very much do, but more because the vast majority of claims are frankly bull. This guy did something grand, and I didn't like it. Mary sue. I mean, head down into the Black Templars subforum, and you'll see complaints that Abaddon is mary sue simply on the principle that he kills Sigismund. Abaddon is mary sue, because he isn't letting Sigismund be mary sue.

It's laughable, and I have just grown used to ignoring it.

I'm not claiming Khayon is a Mary Sue, I just fear that he is approaching the border of good character land and Mary Sue land, and once you cross the line it's really hard to get back.

[Kol Saresk]

To be fair, IA13 is a current printed book that repeats the campaign results of Chaos winning, bursting through the Cadian Gate and the Imperium doing all it can just to stem the tide. So, you didn't win. :D

 

Also, Khayon isn't really Mary Sue. Mary Sue is a specific realm where nothing can defeat the character and keep him defeated. For example, Ichigo from Bleach. Every time a new threat appeared, he suddenly gains a new power that immediately owns anyone else. His only fall back is that at any point in time that he is killed or the Hollow is able to take control, he becomes an even more powerful arrancar. Goku, is dead most of the time. Is still able to beat back a good portion of the villains just by bleaching his hair and wearing green eye contacts.

 

Khayon. Can't fight one of his own daemons by himself. Has no grand purpose other than to deliver a message as the Final Siege of Terra takes place. And he's Mary Sue because he is a blind prisoner with no psychic powers and a broken body that is currently crucified, all because he says "I'm right where I need to be"?

 

Honestly, I'd have to ask for more elaboration on that point. Not saying you are wrong, just that I am not aware of the path of reasoning.

[Conn Eremon]

To be fair, IA13 is a current printed book that repeats the campaign results of Chaos winning, bursting through the Cadian Gate and the Imperium doing all it can just to stem the tide. So, you didn't yet win. :D

Forgot a little something something, thought I should I help you out.

[A D-B]

There seems to be some inconsistency between the prior rather one-dimensional "angrymarine" portrayal of Abaddon and ADB's Abaddon

Inconsistency only annoys me when the inconsistency doesn't improve upon the prior fluff. I think everyone here would agree that ADB's characterisation of Abaddon is far superior to the choleric, "Abaddon angry, Abaddon smash" characterisation of earlier works.

Furthermore, ADB isn't ignoring Abaddon's previous characterisation. Abaddon's pilgrimage obviously had a huge effect on his character. I believe what we have here isn't a case of authorial inconsistency...rather it's a case of ADB trying to develop a character. He's improving upon a simplistic, rather implausible earlier portrayal.

Choleric Abaddon develops into Charismatic Abaddon...like how Pathetic Lorgar develops into Confident Lorgar. Pivotal events unlock previously latent personality traits.

My problem with this is the sheer disparity between the two. At least with Lorgar, it's easily plausible. We know he's a religious fanatic, and he searches for the kind of inner strength that he can derive from faith. Abaddon in the Horus Heresy is characterised only by his 'war-dog' persona. In the first three books, he just struts around being angry and xenophobic. In Deliverance Lost, he's simply barking at the foes of Horus. In Vengeful Spirit, he's so choleric his only contribution to the orbital assault is the backing up of Falkus Kibre's generic suggestion.

While I'm not saying you're wrong - I 100% agree (obviously) that his pilgrimage is responsible for this change - I feel like he needs to be written better in the Heresy. The only change we've seen so far over the entire course of the Horus Heresy series is the kindling of his ambition due to his exposure to the golden spirit in Vengeful Spirit - character development with no real path. While they don't need to make him the same Abaddon as in Talon of Horus, there should be a middle ground. We should be seeing glimpses of his charisma, his leadership, his ability. All we see thus far is an almost childish anger, and while I like that he's fanatically loyal to Horus, one gets the feeling purely from the series that he got his position by virtue of being a fanatic, not a skilled war leader.

I mean, honestly, if we didn't about who Abaddon was from 40k or weren't told occasionally in the novels/FW books that he was a feared space marine with a great tally of victories, would the portrayal of him in the Horus Heresy show us this? Certainly not, in my opinion.

Still, the positive is that after all these years, one of my favourite characters is finally receiving the attention he deserves from an author with enough skill to not write him off as a ravening lunatic. Loved the book and enjoyed reading the thoughts of others in this topic.

This is a really, really interesting point. And it's central to the series, as well as on the broader level of writing for 40K (and all IPs) in general. What, exactly, do you need to reference? What, exactly, do you need to be true to? How far can you take something past what's been shown before?

I'm sure there'll be some people that get up in arms about the disparity, and it'll only fuel the fire if I say that I don't really care how he's presented in the Heresy. I'm not saying it's good or bad, wrong or right. I'll read it all and bear it in mind, but my intention is to be true to the character, not true to everything every other author has written about him. Jesus, I'm not even being entirely true to how I've written him; in Soul Hunter Talos has a moment of melancholic self-delusion where he does his whole "We are the shadows of our fathers..." spiel, which sounds great. But it's not true. Talos is intensely self-deceiving - it's an integral point of his character. He wasn't seeing Abaddon - he was seeing what he thought Abaddon was. I'm not going to write Abaddon from Talos' POV, obviously.

Ultimately, you need to be true to a character's concept and role, not to the minutiae of his every event in conflicting authors' portrayals. That would be impossible, and even if you coulkd do it, you'd have a Frankenstein's Monster of a character with no consistency or appeal. Sometimes, seriously, when fans ask for X and consider it attention to detail, it can border on pedantry to the detriment of good writing and presenting the 40K setting. Look at any internet comment about the Star Wars EU, and you'll have someone saying "Actually, in graphic novel X, character Y went to planet Z, to find crystal A...". That can rock! But when you have several dozen of those listed events, all written by different creators, you're usually left with a conflicted mess of a character with a varying personality and shifting competence.

Dan's Space Wolves in Prospero Burns are a good example. A great example, even. People handwave the differences to, say, Bill King's Space Wolves and just say "Oh, it's 10,000 years ago." But that's silly. They're so different because Dan didn't like a lot of the comedic aspects of the Space Wolves - he thought a lot of their more famous elements were blunt and overdone, which is a fair point - and changed them into his vision of something more serious. Vikings in space, but done to his tone. True to the concept, true to the lore, but not true to every other Space Wolf story. And really, that's a great way to approach 40K. That's... kind of what we're supposed to do. It's certainly what fans, readers, and gamers do. No one's 40K is exactly the same as anyone else's.

So, back to Abaddon.

Abaddon, in the Heresy, is the second-in-command of the (widely-assumed/acknowledged) "best/most successful" Space Marine Legion, purely in terms of the lore rather than my personal opinion. My opinion has zero to do with any of this. I'm talking about how even in the Great Crusade and the Horus Heresy, Abaddon was the highest-ranking Space Marine in the 'favoured' Legion, and one of the most recognisable heroes alive at the time. He would oversee vast, vast campaigns of men, materiel, and territory, spanning nations, continents, worlds, systems, and subsectors. He (like any Space Marine commander, but the Legion Masters most of all) must have been a general beyond human reckoning, with a mind for logistics more like a supercomputer in scope.

Presumably, he didn't rise to such a station just on account of being good with a lighting claw and by being hot-tempered. I mean, this is what Space Marines are, and their commanders most of all.

That's Abaddon's place. That's what I, in exploring Abaddon, need to show. Even before his changes, that's what he was. You can say he is or isn't presented like that in the Heresy series, and ultimately I'll say I don't care. To do my job well, in a series about the Black Legion, I need to show what Abaddon ultimately is (insofar as I understand it), and not necessarily what he is as shown in other portrayals. That's not me ignoring lore, that's me being professional about this mad and complicated process. Look at the novels about, say, Alexander the Great. Does a historical fiction writer go from historical records of events and his own perceptions of what it took to really be Alexander, or does he focus almost entirely on what other fiction writers have done in showing the character? That's really what 40K is. Different authors taking on the same setting, through their own lenses.

Being true to 40K is what matters, not being true to each other's perceptions of the setting. My Word Bearers have absolutely nothing to do with Ant Reynolds' Word Bearers, but they're all recognisably Word Bearers all the same. I've seen several armies that include elements of both of our Word Bearer lore, yet our stuff is entirely different and has almost no overlap. Still both Word Bearers, though. Even the parts that conflict. That's the key.

Some of us (and I'm one of them) care a great deal about trying not to conflict over things like dates and events and portrayals unless we can help it, of course. But even that's not necessary or even beneficial a lot of the time. And in a series about Abaddon and the Black Legion itself, I'm not really interested in repeating a lot of the portrayals we've seen of them before - especially because they're usually seen as "vanilla" (they're not) and Abaddon is taken as a failure (he's not), and so on. This has to be... more involved. It has to answer why Abaddon is so feared and so competent. If that means going against other portrayals, then... well, good. That doesn't make them right and this one wrong just because it's different. It doesn't make it a "retcon". In fact, "retcon" is a word that pretty much loses you any lore argument with someone who gets how 40K functions, for all of the above reasons.

Abaddon's Pilgrimage presents a lot of explanation for his differences, as does the fact he's now seen more of Chaos than practically any other mortal in history. It's not about trying to make the galaxy's Big Bad retconned into supremacy. He already has that supremacy, like it or not. It's in every single Chaos Codex and main rulebook and Christ knows how many other slices of lore, for decades. And this is about giving that some context. Some explanation. Some revelation.

[A D-B]

I read it, I liked it, but I am worried. I'm worried that the Black Legion might contract Ultramarine/Draigo syndrome and become the "bestest chaos marines evar" and all the other legions want to be like the black legion and so on. I'm also worried about Khayon. They way he is written so far I like but he slides dangerously close to being a Mary Sue. I hope ADB proves my worries wrong.

 

Michael Jordan was, at one point, the best basketball player in the world. The most successful, the most talented, and the most famous. Those are all facts. That doesn't mean every other basketball player wanted to be him (or even liked him), but it does mean he was the most successful, most talented, and the most famous. Acknowledging that something is more successful than its similar contemporaries doesn't make the contemporaries bad, weak, or jealous. There were still dozens of All-Star players during the years when Michael Jordan was transcendant.

 

On one hand, I'm not going to diminish the threat of the Black Legion, and Abaddon's eventual supremacy, just because some people don't like the fact that the Black Legion is so dominant. I can't change that, I can only try to give it context. And on the other hand, just because one faction is dominant, doesn't mean the other factions are useless or ineffectual. John Starks threw down on Michael Jordan and Horace Grant, making one of the coolest dunk posters of all time. 

[A D-B]

I mean, head down into the Black Templars subforum, and you'll see complaints that Abaddon is mary sue simply on the principle that he kills Sigismund. Abaddon is mary sue, because he isn't letting Sigismund be mary sue.

 

It's laughable, and I have just grown used to ignoring it.

 

I totally saw that! This happens very, very rarely, but I was embarrassed on behalf of those posters. 

[Kol Saresk]

 

To be fair, IA13 is a current printed book that repeats the campaign results of Chaos winning, bursting through the Cadian Gate and the Imperium doing all it can just to stem the tide. So, you didn't yet win. :D

Forgot a little something something, thought I should I help you out.

Yet implies hope. And we all know how hope turns out in the grim and dark future of Warhammer 40,000. ;)

[mc warhammer]

ADB, point taken about Space Wolves and the writer's choice to define and contextualise the concept in the best way he can.

 

But I think it's unfair to wave away the resdership's attempt to rationalize the differences as a progression over 10, 000 years. The way you talk about the license and the property sounds like a writer's dream and it plays to the strength of the creator (which is ultimately to the audience's benefit ), but readers tend toward creating some form if cohesion between stories for their own sake of comfort and suspension of disbelief.

 

Which is what I thought 40k more or less encouraged in its resdership. Their rationalisation for the SW's different depictions is no sillier than the concept of the Space Wolves in and of itself.

[Tenebris]

Oh... just... bloody come on! It is the BLACK LEGION people, it is ABADDON... if there is something scary, but really really scary in the Warhammer 40k universe it is them... period. The other legions have their spotlights, have their heroes and have their epic moments, but it is Abaddon and Abaddon alone who is there to bring the rotting edifice that it is the Imperium of Man down, and he created a legion with this task in mind. Not a warband, not even just an army, but a legion... a legion.

 

The Black Legion is the ultimate badass in the 40k universe but this by no means diminishes the role of the other traitors, in fact IMO it only enhances it. Abaddon has to deal with the daemon primarchs, he has to convince other traitor forces to join him, he has to play this game of politics but eventually, inevitably the leader of Chaos is he and he alone. He is the visionary, the antichrist, and we others as good traitors we are have to follow him, willingly or unwillingly.

 

And it was about bloody time that we of Chaos would have someone of us kill some important loyalist. Killing loyalists is what Chaos does best but in all truth, in all those years of my faithful devotion to Chaos I have seen almost no loyalist of import die to a Chaos warlord, THE chaos warlord in question here. 

 

Let the others rant all they like, Talon of Horus is an awesome book, and the prospect of killing Sigismund it makes it only sweeter. A true balm for every Chaos soul out there. As for you loyalists, you have your Marneus, Sicarus and other people who are being praised for almost 15 years. Allow to us, the ever humbled Chaos to have some vengeance at last, a few kills of import, a few worthy skulls for the Skull Throne. I think we deserve it after so many years spent as mere spit buckets for the loyalists. 

 

And yes... the more loyalist marines ADB kills in the series, the better. As I have said, and I reckon every Chaos brother and sister will echo me, it was about time...

[Loesh]

Oh... just... bloody come on! It is the BLACK LEGION people, it is ABADDON... if there is something scary, but really really scary in the Warhammer 40k universe it is them... period. The other legions have their spotlights, have their heroes and have their epic moments, but it is Abaddon and Abaddon alone who is there to bring the rotting edifice that it is the Imperium of Man down, and he created a legion with this task in mind. Not a warband, not even just an army, but a legion... a legion.

 

The Black Legion is the ultimate badass in the 40k universe but this by no means diminishes the role of the other traitors, in fact IMO it only enhances it. Abaddon has to deal with the daemon primarchs, he has to convince other traitor forces to join him, he has to play this game of politics but eventually, inevitably the leader of Chaos is he and he alone. He is the visionary, the antichrist, and we others as good traitors we are have to follow him, willingly or unwillingly.

 

And it was about bloody time that we of Chaos would have someone of us kill some important loyalist. Killing loyalists is what Chaos does best but in all truth, in all those years of my faithful devotion to Chaos I have seen almost no loyalist of import die to a Chaos warlord, THE chaos warlord in question here. 

 

Let the others rant all they like, Talon of Horus is an awesome book, and the prospect of killing Sigismund it makes it only sweeter. A true balm for every Chaos soul out there. As for you loyalists, you have your Marneus, Sicarus and other people who are being praised for almost 15 years. Allow to us, the ever humbled Chaos to have some vengeance at last, a few kills of import, a few worthy skulls for the Skull Throne. I think we deserve it after so many years spent as mere spit buckets for the loyalists. 

 

And yes... the more loyalist marines ADB kills in the series, the better. As I have said, and I reckon every Chaos brother and sister will echo me, it was about time...

 

Oooh boy, I passed out and woke up to this, i'll try to explain as best I can.

 

After some thought I realized...really that isn't how things should be written, when you can put 'success' as an organization trait compared to it's other groups then that is a badly written organization that intentionally or not tends to alienate other legions. Not that I think ADB could begin to do something about that if he wanted to, because that's not his call, that's Games Workshops call.

 

After some thought I found that, what Abaddon should of been was a mediator...not a conqueror, the Black Legion would of worked as the biggest gathering of traitors but not the most important one. This, in my humble opinion, would of led to a much better and well received character. Earlier on I was talking about Magnus and bobbing my head along to the idea that Magnus would be out of all the Primarch's the most likely one to kneel out of all of them, the thought process was that all the Primarch's are flawed in some way and some more broken then others, out of all of them Magnus would be the most likely of them to physically kneel. But then one night I said to myself.....is that really the best way to handle these characters? No, no I don't think it is.

 

I understand where you're coming from Tenebris, but  saying something is the ultimate badass but at the same time doesn't diminish everything else is a statement that simply doesn't work. Ultimate is end, greatest, pinnacle, above all others and most extreme, everything but ultimate is lesser by extension.

 

As for Sigismund? I just want to say that is a....tenuous line of thinking, I feel Chaos has been the worfed underdog for far too long as well, but to kill Loyalist characters just because 'it's about time' seems...dangerous...at best.

[Tenebris]

I agree, partially, with you Loesh. I think that the Black Legion is indeed the ultimate chaos astartes faction out there, it has to be, it is their character and their role in the 40k universe. This on the other hand does not diminish the other traitors (EC in your case) but it only enhances their role in the Chaos politics. Consider the following, we have this massive shadow, this massive military might which is above and beyond anything else bar the legions of daemons in the Eye. This shadow is the Black Legion, its tendrils are spread across the Eye and it demands to be recognized. In this shadow, under this "black leviathan" as it is my word for the Black Legion we have the other chaos legions and warbands. This shadow gives context to them all, it evens the playground for them, it allows them to either play Abaddon's game or rebel against it, this "black leviathan" is there and all have sooner or later to deal with it.

 

How the specific warband, primarch and traitor deals with the Black Legion is the very thing which defines them in the story ark of 999.M41. This definition provides context and a very effective "plot device" to instaurate all sorts of relationships, all sorts of legends pertaining the individual warband. To say that the Black Legion in M41 is anything but the ultimate chaos legion is to be in error, for this is their persona, their role in the story, the role of the archvillain and its army.

 

Your fear as I see it is that individual traitor legions like the Emperor's Children are diminished because of this but truth be told it is not only them but also the other legions which are now in the shadow of the Black Legion. Remember Abaddon forced his way to a personal meeting with Lorgar, a primarch who did not even answer the summons of his own legion, but not even the Dark Council and the Word Bearers, being perhaps the second most powerful astartes faction in the Eye could not ignore the very real threat presented by the Black Legion.

 

Consider the remaining traitor legions as separate kingdoms who vie for power in the shadow of the Black Legion kingdom. This kingdoms are defined by their interaction with the Black Legion and may or may not ally with it, but none can dare to defy it for they have not the means to counter the Black kingdom.

 

In a feudal society (broad term I agree) that is the Empire of the Eye with the Black Legion series we will learn about the rise of one kingdom and one warlord. A kingdom and a warlord who still need other, minor or hell even lesser kingdoms if he is about to see the realization of his millennia spanning plan, a warlord and a kingdom who despite their immense might still need the support of their lesser vassals in order to prosper and win the Long War. 

[Loesh]

I agree, partially, with you Loesh. I think that the Black Legion is indeed the ultimate chaos astartes faction out there, it has to be, it is their character and their role in the 40k universe. This on the other hand does not diminish the other traitors (EC in your case) but it only enhances their role in the Chaos politics. Consider the following, we have this massive shadow, this massive military might which is above and beyond anything else bar the legions of daemons in the Eye. This shadow is the Black Legion, its tendrils are spread across the Eye and it demands to be recognized. In this shadow, under this "black leviathan" as it is my word for the Black Legion we have the other chaos legions and warbands. This shadow gives context to them all, it evens the playground for them, it allows them to either play Abaddon's game or rebel against it, this "black leviathan" is there and all have sooner or later to deal with it.

 

Said black Leviathan would be interesting, i'd like it even...if it was confined to some area of space. The thing is, having everything essentially revolve around the Black Legion also gives one the sense of 'Why am I even playing this?' because you'll never be as great, you'll never do as much, and your faction has no chance of gaining as much, your capacity to be a badass will constantly be measured against this bigger badass and due to how the setting is shaped it will always be found wanting. You shouldn't be defined by whether or not you are or are not with Abaddon nor should you be greatly limited by it, you should be defined by who you are and what you achieve with your accomplishments not rendered...ultimately...inconsequential.

[A D-B]

ADB, point taken about Space Wolves and the writer's choice to define and contextualise the concept in the best way he can.

 

But I think it's unfair to wave away the resdership's attempt to rationalize the differences as a progression over 10, 000 years. The way you talk about the license and the property sounds like a writer's dream and it plays to the strength of the creator (which is ultimately to the audience's benefit ), but readers tend toward creating some form if cohesion between stories for their own sake of comfort and suspension of disbelief.

 

Which is what I thought 40k more or less encouraged in its resdership. Their rationalisation for the SW's different depictions is no sillier than the concept of the Space Wolves in and of itself.

 

Absolutely. And I don't handwave it away, by any means. That's not what I meant - I've discussed the merits and angles on that exact thing a lot. I've gone record X-hundred times saying "Yep, the differences with the Wolves are because of 10,000 years" like loads of other people.

 

But that's the thing: We always talk about the usual angle, and what people expect and assume in most licenses, and the in-universe reasons for things. That's been done to death, in various ways. It's true, but it's obvious, and it's been talked about a lot. This is a case where there's really more to it than, well, most other licenses. It's a "Yes, but behind the curtain, it functions like this..." moment.

[Loesh]

To be fair, IA13 is a current printed book that repeats the campaign results of Chaos winning, bursting through the Cadian Gate and the Imperium doing all it can just to stem the tide. So, you didn't win.

Also, Khayon isn't really Mary Sue. Mary Sue is a specific realm where nothing can defeat the character and keep him defeated. For example, Ichigo from Bleach. Every time a new threat appeared, he suddenly gains a new power that immediately owns anyone else. His only fall back is that at any point in time that he is killed or the Hollow is able to take control, he becomes an even more powerful arrancar. Goku, is dead most of the time. Is still able to beat back a good portion of the villains just by bleaching his hair and wearing green eye contacts.

Khayon. Can't fight one of his own daemons by himself. Has no grand purpose other than to deliver a message as the Final Siege of Terra takes place. And he's Mary Sue because he is a blind prisoner with no psychic powers and a broken body that is currently crucified, all because he says "I'm right where I need to be"?

Honestly, I'd have to ask for more elaboration on that point. Not saying you are wrong, just that I am not aware of the path of reasoning.

Ahem, addressing this: That's a very narrow definition of what a Mary Sue can be, while things have no doubt diluted the term, there are equally valid ones where the character doesn't always win. Thinking about what Magnus Son said(Who is for some reason a Trap Marine.) I believe he's referring to type B, or the Drizzit Do'Urden "All my flaws/defeats only show how cool of a character I am." variety, which...dear god...are there few things more infuriating.

Like I said, I don't believe Khayon is a Mary Sue, but I can see how that can be seen as Sueish.

[Tenebris]

The singular accomplishment is actually measured in blood and corruption. Simply the Black Legion killed more and corrupted more across ten thousand years of the Imperium, perhaps only the daemons, the true scions of Chaos, accomplished more. I think that what we will witness in the Black Legion series is a gradual elevation of the Black Legion to its role in M41. Before that, all is game but in 999.M41 the game is over, the final battle dawns, all that has been done before, said before, fought before that will culminate in the last, 13th Black Crusade. 

 

I think it is very proper to present the Black Legion as the ultimate chaos faction in M41, while the room for personal interpretation is in the ten thousand years before 999.M41. And no, I think it is unwise to even expect for the cult legions or other traitor legions to be on par with the Black Legion by midnight 999.M41, at least not according to lore.

 

But everything, anything that happened before the end of all times is fair game, for any Chaos faction. 

 

As for killing loyalist characters... well it is about time to have some tangible, bloody vindication for all this years of abuse in lore. I understand that the good guys dominate the scene but murdering loyalist characters is a good way, a small step to at long last put the legend of Abaddon (and trough him the chaos legions) into their rightful place as the big bad evil of the grimdark Warhammer 40k universe, a small step, but a very important one. 

 

As for Khayon... in my eyes he is anything but a Mary Sue. He is a guarded, intellectual character, his mindset like the one of many Thousand Sons is a labyrinth, a shrine to sorcerous power and academic knowledge. He is distant, he appears curious yet also cynic and I would define him as a very much an INTJ profile. He is the kind of character whose role is to explain the things that are happening and since ADB elected him to be a psyker he is also the first avenue trough which we of Chaos would actually learn what sorcery is, and how it looks in practice. 

 

The faults, the relationships and the goals of the character are exactly as the ones I would suspect such a character to have, guarded. This only makes Khayon a very interesting character to read about and I praise ADB since he was able to keep his front man quite neutral compared to the other characters in the books as well as compared to big A himself. 

 

By all intents and purposes, Warhammer 40k fiction needs more scholar characters... they bring complexity to the setting and to a story. 

[Loesh]

The singular accomplishment is actually measured in blood and corruption. Simply the Black Legion killed more and corrupted more across ten thousand years of the Imperium, perhaps only the daemons, the true scions of Chaos, accomplished more. I think that what we will witness in the Black Legion series is a gradual elevation of the Black Legion to its role in M41. Before that, all is game but in 999.M41 the game is over, the final battle dawns, all that has been done before, said before, fought before that will culminate in the last, 13th Black Crusade. 

 

I think it is very proper to present the Black Legion as the ultimate chaos faction in M41, while the room for personal interpretation is in the ten thousand years before 999.M41. And no, I think it is unwise to even expect for the cult legions or other traitor legions to be on par with the Black Legion by midnight 999.M41, at least not according to lore.

 

But everything, anything that happened before the end of all times is fair game, for any Chaos faction. 

 

As for killing loyalist characters... well it is about time to have some tangible, bloody vindication for all this years of abuse in lore. I understand that the good guys dominate the scene but murdering loyalist characters is a good way, a small step to at long last put the legend of Abaddon (and trough him the chaos legions) into their rightful place as the big bad evil of the grimdark Warhammer 40k universe, a small step, but a very important one. 

 

I think on the subject it's best to agree to disagree, because it's not something that's wrong with the lore itself, just how one thinks the lore should be run which has been argued about...forever.

 

For example, being channeled through Abaddon as the Big Bad of Warhammer makes me physically cringe, it's something each legion should do on their own merits, that's not how it's going to be and I can already tell, but that's how I think it should be.

 

I don't mind killing Loyalist characters as long as it's for good reason, i'm worried about it escalating to the point where it's just to show Chaos killing loyalists.

[Tenebris]

But I think it is also fairly understandable to say that for example the Emperor's Children cannot in M41 hold the candle to the Black Legion. As I have said even the mighty Word Bearers had to kneel and Lorgar had to accept the summons of Abaddon when the skies of Sicarus darkened with Black Legion ships. And I think we both agree that the Emperor's Children are nowhere near to the military might and cohesion of the XVIIth legion in the dawn of the M41. 

 

Abaddon is the pivotal character, the fulcrum trough which Chaos is once more ascendant. It is he and his vision, as well as his undying hatred that allowed for the creation of the Black Legion, a brotherhood for the brotherless, a faction united, a rarity among the Chaos factions. I think it is only fair to elaborate our fluff around him and his legion, hell even in the Black Crusade RPG books you can earn the Commendation of the Warmaster as one of the highest honors in the Eye, this speaks volumes. 

 

Consider Abaddon's role similar to the role of Horus in the Heresy era. He was the fulcrum, his vision and command united the traitors and guided them to Terra. In his shadow, in the shadow of this vision, the other traitor legions had their legends, had their crusades, had their stories, but in the end all ended on Terra and it was only trough the vision of the first Warmaster that the traitors were "united" in shattering the realm of the Emperor. Like it or not every traitor legion was shaped by Horus, as Horus himself was shaped by them. 

 

In M41 all traitor legions are shaped by Abaddon and his Black Legion as well as Abaddon and the Black Legion are shaped by the other traitor legions. Yet... the vision, the driving force, the fulcrum is only one, Abaddon and his Black Legion. 

[Loesh]

But I think it is also fairly understandable to say that for example the Emperor's Children cannot in M41 hold the candle to the Black Legion. As I have said even the mighty Word Bearers had to kneel and Lorgar had to accept the summons of Abaddon when the skies of Sicarus darkened with Black Legion ships. And I think we both agree that the Emperor's Children are nowhere near to the military might and cohesion of the XVIIth legion in the dawn of the M41. 

 

Abaddon is the pivotal character, the fulcrum trough which Chaos is once more ascendant. It is he and his vision, as well as his undying hatred that allowed for the creation of the Black Legion, a brotherhood for the brotherless, a faction united, a rarity among the Chaos factions. I think it is only fair to elaborate our fluff around him and his legion, hell even in the Black Crusade RPG books you can earn the Commendation of the Warmaster as one of the highest honors in the Eye, this speaks volumes. 

 

Consider Abaddon's role similar to the role of Horus in the Heresy era. He was the fulcrum, his vision and command united the traitors and guided them to Terra. In his shadow, in the shadow of this vision, the other traitor legions had their legends, had their crusades, had their stories, but in the end all ended on Terra and it was only trough the vision of the first Warmaster that the traitors were "united" in shattering the realm of the Emperor. Like it or not every traitor legion was shaped by Horus, as Horus himself was shaped by them. 

 

In M41 all traitor legions are shaped by Abaddon and his Black Legion as well as Abaddon and the Black Legion are shaped by the other traitor legions. Yet... the vision, the driving force, the fulcrum is only one, Abaddon and his Black Legion. 

 

And....is that a good way to handle the Chaos faction? I don't think it is.

 

Personally, i'd rather be an imperial bootlick. Or rather, be in the shadow of the Ultramarines.

[Conn Eremon]

I think Loesh's point is that Abaddon is the fulcrum, the lens through which all of Chaos is reflected, but that he would prefer it if he was not. That instead, you had multiple fulcrums spread liberally about the Nine Legions. It is that Abaddon is singular, and singularly above, that rubs him the wrong way. He doesn't disagree that this is the case, he is just iterating his opinion on how he would prefer it to be instead.

[Loesh]

I think Loesh's point is that Abaddon is the fulcrum, the lens through which all of Chaos is reflected, but that he would prefer it if he was not. That instead, you had multiple fulcrums spread liberally about the Nine Legions. It is that Abaddon is singular, and singularly above, that rubs him the wrong way. He doesn't disagree that this is the case, he is just iterating his opinion on how he would prefer it to be instead.

 

Bingo, I don't disagree with anything you're saying about him in lore, nor have I ever. I never thought Failbaddon was very valid, nor will I ever.

 

That said, that doesn't mean I think how is handled now is particularly good.