Battle for the Abyss and other BL novels

[Brother-Chaplain Kage]

I've avoided HH books for Legions I don't really care for, namely Ultramarines, Dark Angels, and now thanks to the authors making Fulgrim the most annoying character I've had the displeasure to suffer through, the Emperor's Children. My new job can sometimes have a lot of downtime, so out of boredom and a used book store that seems to have a regular influx of 40k/30k books, I decided to go back and read some of these. 

 

I should have stuck to my guns.

 

Are we doing melodrama now, for these books? Is that what there is to look forward to from some of the other authors? This book didn't have characters, it had caricatures. Could Zadkiel have been any more of a mustache-twirling bad guy who says stereotypical bad guy stuff and does stereotypical bad guy things? Also, he was a complete idiot and should never have been put in charge of something on the scale of the mission or the Furious Abyss itself.

 

And just the opposite is Cestus, the intolerable goody-two-shoes hero that's got a stick of righteousness stuck so far up his backside that it's almost coming out of his mouth.

 

Oh, and then there's Brynngar, or as I liked to call him, Everything Wrong With The Space Wolves. Let's see...

 

Angry? Check.

Drunk? Check.

Impatient? Check.

Ignores logic? Check.

Makes you realize how much a different author can make you HATE a Legion that another author made awesome? Check.

 

I slogged through Counter's Grey Knights a while back, and threw Soul Drinker away after the libby exploded into a giant spider. This was strike three.

[TrafficCustodes]

Yeah. No argument here. I didn't hate the book, but it felt like I was wincing at the cliched dialogue and over-the-top budget fantasy phrasing at least once per page. BFTA is generally seen as the absolute nadir of the series, though, so... you could say the only way to go is up?

 

Also, at this point it seems very unlikely Ben Counter will write a Heresy book again. And I thought 'Galaxy In Flames' was pretty much fine, so he's not all bad.

 

If you're avoiding books based on Legion bias, though, you are missing out on some great ones. (But those first two Dark Angels books are pretty rough.)

[Chaeron]

Also, at this point it seems very unlikely Ben Counter will write a Heresy book again. And I thought 'Galaxy In Flames' was pretty much fine, so he's not all bad.

 

Sadly, it seems like Swallow, Scanlon and Counter will probably be forever exiled.

 

Such is life. We demand Rob Sanders.

[Brother-Chaplain Kage]

Yeah. No argument here. I didn't hate the book, but it felt like I was wincing at the cliched dialogue and over-the-top budget fantasy phrasing at least once per page. BFTA is generally seen as the absolute nadir of the series, though, so... you could say the only way to go is up?

 

Also, at this point it seems very unlikely Ben Counter will write a Heresy book again. And I thought 'Galaxy In Flames' was pretty much fine, so he's not all bad.

 

If you're avoiding books based on Legion bias, though, you are missing out on some great ones. (But those first two Dark Angels books are pretty rough.)

 

Prior to reading this, I considered Nemesis to be to the worst HH book I had read but it might be a tie between these two. If counter doesn't touch the HH again, I won't be upset. I read Galaxy in Flames when it first came out 8 years ago and don't remember it being awful, but neither do I remember it standing out as anything spectacular either.

 

I did give the first Dark Angels book a try, but I was close to 100 pages in and I was so bored I quit reading it.

 

 

 

Also, at this point it seems very unlikely Ben Counter will write a Heresy book again. And I thought 'Galaxy In Flames' was pretty much fine, so he's not all bad.

 

Sadly, it seems like Swallow, Scanlon and Counter will probably be forever exiled.

 

Such is life. We demand Rob Sanders.

 

 

YAY! Swallow is gone too?! I dunno if I've read anything by Sanders.

[TrafficCustodes]

Swallow is doing audio dramas and short stories fairly regularly - and I thought he was doing the new Death Guard novel, as well? I might be wrong there, as I don't think anything's been confirmed. In any case, he hasn't been completely banished from the Heresy team. Extremely negative reaction to his last two novels might not have helped, but people seem to hate Gav's HH books as well, and they haven't got rid of him.

 

I don't blame you for putting the Dark Angels book down. The thing is, BFTA is at least fairly readable. I've read it twice now, and each time it took me only a couple days to get through it. Each time I finished it and thought "that was pretty stupid" (and the second time I was noting down the worst sentences as I read) but I didn't feel it was a complete waste of time. The plot begins moving quickly, it's clear from the beginning what's going on, and the fact that everyone's a caricature means there's no moments of "Who the heck IS that character again?" It feels like a filler book, written quickly to fill a scheduling hole - and being between 'Legion' and 'Mechanicum', which are both quite well-regarded, is a tough position for a book like that.

 

In contrast 'Descent Of Angels' moves very, very slowly, and (I think) offers very little to mitigate how slow it is: not much character depth, no particularly original background for the Legion, and not even much in the way of boneheaded yet enjoyable action sequences.

 

So which other Heresy novels have you been avoiding?

[Brother-Chaplain Kage]

Here's the list of novels I have yet to read or didn't finish:

 

Descent of Angels - didn't finish
Fallen Angels - avoiding
A Thousand Sons - didn't finish

First Heretic - didn't finish
Outcast Dead
Deliverance Lost - avoiding
Fear to Tread
Vulkan Lives - heard really awful things, not sure if I'll try it
Vengeful Spirit (just picked it up today)

[TrafficCustodes]

Not hugely surprised by that list, and you've given a lot of them a try, so you have a pretty good idea of what you're missing.

 

The ones you haven't touched... yeah, you won't find many people who like those. I like some of them, but... I'd say you're better off leaving them unread...

[Chaeron]

 

 

Also, at this point it seems very unlikely Ben Counter will write a Heresy book again. And I thought 'Galaxy In Flames' was pretty much fine, so he's not all bad.

 

Sadly, it seems like Swallow, Scanlon and Counter will probably be forever exiled.

 

Such is life. We demand Rob Sanders.

 

 

YAY! Swallow is gone too?! I dunno if I've read anything by Sanders.

 

 

Sorry, idle speculation. Nothing confirmed. I actually do like most of his writing - and perhaps of all BL authors, he has improved noticeably over his career. A far better writer now - even if his stuff draws some quite polar responses.

 

Gav naturally polarises with writing - perhaps more so, although definitely seems to be one of the more reviled authors of the series. I actually like his stuff - so to each their own. Has Ravenlord sold out yet...?

 

I'd prefer it if Swallow stuck to the Audiobooks for the time being, if I'm honest - because he does them really well. 

[TrafficCustodes]

No, 'Ravenlord' still hasn't sold out. Somehow, I'm not surprised. I quite like his writing too. I feel kind of bad for the guy, though frankly at this point I'd imagine he avoids googling his name/going on the forums like the plague.

It seems likely you'll get your wish re: Swallow. Listening to the interview i just posted with him in the Garro: Shield Of Lies thread, it sounds like he really pushed BL to do more audio dramas, and that overall it's the format he prefers working in. I also think he's improved over the last few years and that the audio dramas have shown some of his best work. (He's also noticeably reticent on the subject of any non-Garro Heresy work he's doing, so you may be right about him not doing HH novels anymore.)

I like how we're not talking much about BFTA, though IMO there's very little to say about it. I will say that I really enjoyed a couple nice little references to it in the more recent Heresy books - Lorgar talking about Zadkiel's shortcomings in 'Betrayer' (I think), and Polux pointing out the wreck of the Furious Abyss as a glaring security flaw in 'The Unremembered Empire'. Those tiny moments felt like two pretty huge authors in the franchise saying "Hey, man, remember that book? Yeah, it happened. We're not going to act like it didn't." (I'm pretty sure AD-B said somewhere that he liked BFTA quite a bit.)

Kage, I personally think that the idea presented in BFTA - Legion archetypes do a big dumb race against time in a plot slightly reminiscent of a cheesy 80s action movie - was tackled much better in 'The Outcast Dead'. The characters are still Legion tropes, but they're given a bit more depth, and some of them approach fully 3D characterisation; the setting is interesting and given a lot more depth than 'WE IN SPACE, DOGG'; and there are no moustache-twirling cardboard villains.

There is, however, a pretty major continuity issue caused by the book's narrative, one you're probably familiar with if you've been on the forums for any amount of time. It seems to have to completely ruined the book for a lot of people. Myself, I don't mind it, and I can believe Graham's explanation of "I meant it all to happen", but it's a bit of a risk.

...I wouldn't hate Ben Counter coming back to do a novella, or short story. That might be fun. 'Galaxy In Flames' had some pretty good bits.

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

After Deliverance Lost, I am afraid of what Gav does to the RG. 

 

I have Soulforge and Ravenlord, I just havent the courage to read them yet.

 

WLK

[Jareddm]

Counter's recent Sanctus Reach stories have all been quite solid.  That said, I'll be glad if he doesn't write another Horus Heresy novel.  The current "new guys" (Sanders, Haley, Wright, and French) can all write circles around most of the "old guard" and I'd be more than happy to see all of them involved in the Heresy in one way or another.

[lilMAC25]

Yeah. No argument here. I didn't hate the book, but it felt like I was wincing at the cliched dialogue and over-the-top budget fantasy phrasing at least once per page. BFTA is generally seen as the absolute nadir of the series, though, so... you could say the only way to go is up?

 

Also, at this point it seems very unlikely Ben Counter will write a Heresy book again. And I thought 'Galaxy In Flames' was pretty much fine, so he's not all bad.

 

If you're avoiding books based on Legion bias, though, you are missing out on some great ones. (But those first two Dark Angels books are pretty rough.)

Vulcan Lives.

 

Literally one of the worst books I've EVER read, in any genre. BTFA was light years, nay, light millennia better than Vulcan Lives.

[TrafficCustodes]

Have you read 'Pandorax'...?

 

I won't defend 'Vulkan Lives'. I think this is down to the old straightforward plot vs. non-linear plot argument. The non-linear plot, while potentially much more rewarding, seems harder to pull of convincingly than the BL identikit "we are novelising a videogame or action movie" bolterporn. 'Vulkan Lives' meanders through some incredibly boring sections before it gets where it needs to go. It took me over a month to finish that book whereas, like I said, BFTA is a 'done in 24 hours' book for me. I don't enjoy BFTA much but I can speed through it.

 

But, while bland, the writing style for 'VL' didn't make me constantly wince. It didn't feel like Nick Kyme was leafing through a thesaurus as he finished each sentence, saying "Wow, this character has done the same thing about fifty times. Can I use a different word so maybe the reader doesn't notice that I'm repeating myself?"

 

Because of that, it's probably second to 'BFTA' in awfulness, in my eyes at least. (There are actually a couple HH books I enjoyed less than both 'BFTA' and 'VL'.)

[Kilofix]

Which books have you liked BCK? Just to give us a counter point.

[Chaeron]

After Deliverance Lost, I am afraid of what Gav does to the RG. 

 

I have Soulforge and Ravenlord, I just havent the courage to read them yet.

 

WLK

 

They're not that bad at all (neither is DL which gets far more than its fair share of criticism) - and this is coming from a Raven Guard fan. People do just enjoy hating on him.

 

You'll probably enjoy those two short reads more than the novel itself - if you've paid for them, read them.

[Conn Eremon]

 

 

After Deliverance Lost, I am afraid of what Gav does to the RG.

 

I have Soulforge and Ravenlord, I just havent the courage to read them yet.

 

WLK

They're not that bad at all (neither is DL which gets far more than its fair share of criticism) - and this is coming from a Raven Guard fan. People do just enjoy hating on him.

 

You'll probably enjoy those two short reads more than the novel itself - if you've paid for them, read them.

Yeah . . . You really got to stop saying that people who dislike Thorpe's RG books do it just because we "enjoy hating on him," not because we have valid complaints. Not everyone is going to like or dislike the same books, so if you enjoyed them that is awesome for you. But don't insult people just because you like something they don't.

[deathspectersgt7]

DL was'nt bad . Some people like thorpe and some do not but all in all he has books out there while some of us do not.Till that day I won't bash others for liking or disliking an author.

[TrafficCustodes]

I personally second that 'Ravenlord' is pretty enjoyable (not read 'Soulforge'). WLK, if one of your main problems with 'Deliverance Lost' was the Alpha Legion shenanigans, there's nothing like that in 'Ravenlord'. It's a pretty straightforward fight story.

[Chaeron]

 

 

 

After Deliverance Lost, I am afraid of what Gav does to the RG.

 

I have Soulforge and Ravenlord, I just havent the courage to read them yet.

 

WLK

They're not that bad at all (neither is DL which gets far more than its fair share of criticism) - and this is coming from a Raven Guard fan. People do just enjoy hating on him.

 

You'll probably enjoy those two short reads more than the novel itself - if you've paid for them, read them.

Yeah . . . You really got to stop saying that people who dislike Thorpe's RG books do it just because we "enjoy hating on him," not because we have valid complaints. Not everyone is going to like or dislike the same books, so if you enjoyed them that is awesome for you. But don't insult people just because you like something they don't.

That comes across as quite a personal criticism - and at no point was I insulting. Entirely your prerogative what you like or dislike - but the critics are generally as broad as you've just been. I don't recall seeing people actively explain their hatred other than "it doesn't portray the Raven Guard" as they want it to, and often use this to tar his work thereafter. Always happy if someone wants to make an informed critique of any work, but your response is quite tetchy for a comment neither directed at you and to implore another reader to give a text they've not read a chance.

 

All well and good hating it after and making an informed comment thereafter to allow someone to make a decision, although I'm simply saying don't see his HH works as purely negative. Same with the novel we are actively discussing, it's not the worst in the series - and probably not even Counter's best work, but don't put someone off others on the basis of your prejudices, be they positive or negative.

I personally second that 'Ravenlord' is pretty enjoyable (not read 'Soulforge').

The latter is quite quick, I think you'd enjoy it though.

[Conn Eremon]

You are right, I was being irritable, but it's because I am honestly irritated because it seems like almost every time Thorpe is brought up, I see you arrive and unnecessarily claim that those who dislike those books are in the wrong simply because you like it.

 

Maybe all you intend to say is "don't see his HH works as purely negative," but what actually comes out are insults like "people do just enjoy hating on him." You make baseless claims that people have no reason for disliking them or fail to explain themselves, and yeah, when you make general, blanket statements about a group of people, it is directed at everyone within it.

 

It isn't like the same is done to you, that I have seen. Has anyone said you only like his books just to be different from everyone else? That you never give a valid reason for the praise or interest? So why do you feel you have to say that of those who don't? There is no need for it. You don't have to attack someone just to provide your side. Simply providing reasons why you liked the book is enough of a counter to those who express their dislike of it. There do seem to be a lot more who dislike his work rather than like it, but that happens. There a lot of things I like that don't seem to be popular with everyone else, such as the Black Templars worshiping the God-Emperor.

 

So seriously, please just stop with the attacks and insults. That is all I am asking, and all I will say further on the matter, because I am sure continued discussion will only get the thread closed.

 

 

 

To be more on-topic:

@Kieran: I never got ahold of Soulforge, so I can't speak for it, but I felt that Ravenlord had a much more interesting story than Deliverance Lost, if you are concerned that it's basically DL 2. My one complaint is that the dialogue felt disconnected from the characters themselves at multiple parts, especially with Corax. There is an interrogation scene, and some bits where the high morals of the Deliverance-born are expanded upon. It was interesting info, but it didn't really feel like natural dialogue. There were times where it felt really forced, like the dialogue was written without the characters in mind.

 

But the actual tale being told was worthy of note, I felt. For me, the dialogue issues got bad enough as to ruin my enjoyment of the book itself, but if you already own it you should give it a try.

[Wade Garrett]

I didn't like Deliverance Lost because:

 

1. It introduced an unnecessary plot MacGuffin (the super-Astartes creating gene tech) that rapidly became a plot hole I could have piloted Furious Abyss, Trisagion, and Blessed Lady through.

 

(Why did the Emperor just leave it lying around all through the Great Crusade? Why didn't Corax share it with Rogal Dorn? Why take the war winning supertech off the most heavily defended planet in the galaxy to one guarded by the remnants of a shattered, scattered Legion?)

 

2. Corax was written not as a master of guerilla combat and shadow war, but as total nitwit. Ex: Encountering the second to last loyal Word Bearer in the galaxy.

 

Does he give him a chance to explain himself? Does he at least try to interrogate the second to last loyal Word Bearer? No, he punches his head off while bellowing his fury.

Well done, moron.

 

3. Did I mention how idiotic the Alpha Legions plan was? And how galling it was to see it bumble to success with the aid of dose after dose of "Because The Author Said So"?

 

If you want me to buy the XX can infiltrate the XIX...please don't bombard with scene after scene of them blowing their cover in the most obvious ways imaginable.

[TrafficCustodes]

OK man. Let's do it. Again. In the BFTA thread.

 

1. Yeah, this is a pretty huge plot hole, I agree. It feels like the FW books are addressing it a little, implying the Primarch gene-tech always had the ability to super-charge and super-speed the recruitment process for Astartes, but that it was seen as too risky for a full roll-out, since it'd been dabbled in before and it was possibly responsible for the growing instability of some Legions.

Why give it to Corax and not Dorn? From my corner, I'd say that the Emperor's reasoning was that the RG desperately, desperately needed reinforcement. The Fists were at Legion strength, the Raven Guard weren't. A gamble worth making for the RG didn't necessarily make sense for the IF. (The Fists gene-seed was pretty stable, right? And I always assumed they had exclusive rights to all potential recruits on Terra for the entire Age Of Darkness, so they probably didn't lack for numbers, even with a large chunk of the Legion being lost at Phall.)

Lastly, it's a real copout, I know, but the Emperor's actions have been fairly baffling in a lot of ways throughout the Heresy series. I understand you feeling this is the most egregious one, but when I look at it, I take the approach of "well, yet another example of the Emperor's plan not making any sense, nothing much new there". Maybe it will feel less stupid as the series goes on; probably not. Whether it was unnecessary, only time will tell, as it's possible that a book a few years down the line will make it clear why the gene-tech needed to be introduced in this fashion and make it all worthwhile. But I absolutely see why you hated this part of it. 

 

2. Woah, wait a second now. That Word Bearer was a Chaplain - the 'spiritual' centre of the XVII Legion, and one of the most prominent means by which Lorgar corrupted his sons. Furthermore, he was seconded to the RG after Nikaea. We can't guarantee that all WBs were corrupted by then, but I (personally) think it's not inconceivable that he was a traitor, due to his rank and the late hour at which he joined them. It's also completely possible he was loyal, of course. Ultimately we will probably never know if the guy was loyal or not or what his agenda was - I don't think he appears in, or is mentioned in, any other HH fiction.

I agree - Corax's execution of Iarto Khoura was ill-advised and dishonourable. But I also understood, in the context of the book, why Corax did it. He was extremely angry and had spent a lengthy voyage to Terra, then Deliverance, stewing over his betrayal and (probably) particularly annoyed that he hadn't had a chance to finish off Lorgar. You can see how he might find it cathartic to stomp the first WB he saw and ask questions later.

I know this is just one example among many which you feel illustrates Corax in 'DL' is an idiot - I respect your view - just thought I'd mention I disagree with this particular example.

 

3. The AL thing. I've posted way too much about that already when you and Kol raised the issue before. We clearly just see it in different ways. And that's fine.

 

 

...This is why I said that maybe Brother Chaplain Kage should skip 'Deliverance Lost'. The chances are pretty high that he won't like it; I think B&C is probably a good litmus test of fan reaction, though perhaps you just get the more extreme ends of the spectrum here - "I really love this", "I really hate this". And you won't find many who like 'DL' here. The law of averages is against BCK finishing this book and saying "Yeah, that's a good one... underrated!"

 

There are lots of things I like about 'Deliverance Lost' which I feel it doesn't get credit for. The agonising escape sequence where they flee Isstvan. The museum of Humanity's accomplishments on Terra. Dorn and Corax's relationship. Alpharius and Omegon's John Le Carré aspirations. The unassuming nobility of the Raven Guard as a Legion, and their refusal to give in to despair in an unwinnable war they can play no significant part in anymore. That dumb labyrinth scene, which I found myself getting genuinely invested in. That weird explosively violent Emperor's Children fight, tacked on seemingly as an afterthought. But that's just my opinion. No big deal. We all got 'em.

 

...

 

Er, on topic, did anyone like any of the characters from BFTA? Despite myself, I did find myself enjoying Mhotep. He was very shallow, but he made monsters blow up real good. In the end I'm just a Thousand Sons fanboy.

[Chaeron]

You are right, I was being irritable, but it's because I am honestly irritated because it seems like almost every time Thorpe is brought up, I see you arrive and unnecessarily claim that those who dislike those books are in the wrong simply because you like it.

 

Maybe all you intend to say is "don't see his HH works as purely negative," but what actually comes out are insults like "people do just enjoy hating on him." You make baseless claims that people have no reason for disliking them or fail to explain themselves, and yeah, when you make general, blanket statements about a group of people, it is directed at everyone within it.

 

It isn't like the same is done to you, that I have seen. Has anyone said you only like his books just to be different from everyone else? That you never give a valid reason for the praise or interest? So why do you feel you have to say that of those who don't? There is no need for it. You don't have to attack someone just to provide your side. Simply providing reasons why you liked the book is enough of a counter to those who express their dislike of it. There do seem to be a lot more who dislike his work rather than like it, but that happens. There a lot of things I like that don't seem to be popular with everyone else, such as the Black Templars worshiping the God-Emperor.

 

So seriously, please just stop with the attacks and insults. That is all I am asking, and all I will say further on the matter, because I am sure continued discussion will only get the thread closed.

 

I'm really sorry you feel that way - although, it wasn't the way it was meant or written - and I really think you jumped the gun. I certainly haven't made any "attack or insult" - it's not in my nature, I've merely stated what is regularly posted - I haven't vilified you for that, but implored for the chance to actively understand and unpick why these feelings exist. I would just rather that people actively debated and engaged with the text itself and the merits of it, rather than judging by an author which is what is usually done. Wade's analysis below is perfect - it's just looking for that level of engagement. If that's something I've missed of yours, I apologise - although, it seems you have missed much of my engagement with texts in recent time also - so perhaps we're even?

 

From memory, I've only mentioned that his novels get a bad wrap in one other thread (about Ravenlord) - I'm not some sort of white-knight or apologist, so please don't make me out to be. I've had plenty of criticism for his other work (Angels of Darkness, for instance, and the basic editing errors that should've been corrected, in addition to the rather tedious non-linear plot) - and have a number of his other works to plough through in due course. Likewise, I'll analyse them with the same critical lens that I do with all texts in my line of work - and I hope to explore that with others too. As stated, I'm not looking to be controversial or like it because no one else does: because it simply isn't that way. I'm unsure if it's that hard to believe that I actually enjoy reading some of these books, even if they're not perfect canonically or in the way a fan wants them to be. But I certainly want to engage on a literary level, examine their construction, pros and cons, and have a civil intellectual debate about it with like-minded fans.  

 

I digress: let's haul this back on topic and really get at this novel.

[Chaeron]

 

Er, on topic, did anyone like any of the characters from BFTA? Despite myself, I did find myself enjoying Mhotep. He was very shallow, but he made monsters blow up real good. In the end I'm just a Thousand Sons fanboy.

 

Guilty of loving characters who are loyal even if their legions are not: especially Thousand Sons members. Has to be the latent psychic abilities that draws me near. 

 

I think, on reflection - Counter's Ultramarines aren't like Abnett's, nor are his Wolves like Wraight's - two recent examples of people who've almost redefined those Legions with their superb craft. That's not to say that his characterisation is particularly weak - I can tell them apart and they're far from bland, but I think what it lacks is in the depth that each character has within the novel to develop and grow. I think that's partially because of the plot and the nature of it being a pitched battle in space, but as others have also rightly pointed out, it perhaps doesn't develop the respective legions in a tangible way, which in turn limits the characters and their motives. It's somewhat of a "this has to happen" plot device that feels (despite it's place within the overarching narrative and book number in the series) somewhat as an event glossed over, rather than perhaps developed contextually, which impinges on making both sides distinct and the characters relatable in some way.

 

That said, it has been awhile since I've read it - I remember powering through and enjoying it, but it might be worth looking again in depth - as it was a book I enjoyed at the time.

[Brother-Chaplain Kage]

So, this greeted me as soon as I got home:

 

http://i.imgur.com/pVdtgBf.png

 

I was a little concerned, and that appeared to be justified a little bit... let's cool it down a bit, brothers.

 

So which HH books have I liked? A good number of them. Anything by Dan Abnett especially, though I have yet to get to Unremembered Empire.

 

Specifically: Horus Rising, False Gods, Legion, Mechanicum, Prospero Burns, No Know Fear, and Scars. These are ones that I really liked, and there are others I thought were okay. For the longest time, Legion was my favorite, hands down, and as much as I hate to admit liking a book centered around the XIII Legion, I think Know No Fear might have tied it at the least, and possibly edged it out by a narrow margin as favorite, and here's why:

 

1) I think Know No Fear has shown, more than any other(that I've read), the best reaction to the shock and disbelief of the traitor Legions turning on their brothers. 

 

2) I'll admit that at first, I selfishly took some sadistic glee at what was happening to my least favorite Legion, but with credit to Abnett's writing, he actually won me over to the side of Ultras in that book. Let me tell you, getting me to root for the boys in blue is a huge accomplishment by an author.

 

3) Nobody, but nobody, does destruction on a massive scale like Abnett. The suicide ship ambush and the colossal avalanche of destruction that follows left me in complete awe. Probably my favorite action piece from any 40k/30k novel.

 

4) It allowed me to make this little gem when I came up with the Success Marine meme:

 

http://i.imgur.com/GS155m6.jpg

 

 

TrafficCustodes, I agree somewhat about Mhotep from BFtA and felt he was probably the one marine that came closest to being a real character and not a caricature. There's always something satisfying about seeing other marines humbled and/or terrified at the psychic might the sons of Magnus wield.

 

Chaeron, like you said, the author didn't really develop the Legions represented in the book very well.