What happened to the pro-Imperium traitor legionaires?

[Kol Saresk]

Whoever said rationality plays a factor in a universe where the literally impossible is an everyday occurrence?

[Vesper]

so sad that loyalists will fall cuz they wear the wrong colours :'(

 

But then again you never hear of a major loyalist legion having even one traitor, just BS genetic deffects which could be confused with chaosy stufff >_>

 

White Scars and Dark Angels, dude.

And probably all other Legions, but yeah, that's not really talked about much.

 

But if they simply don't want others to know that to them happened what happened with almost every other loyal Legion, then their actions are entirely irrational. But at least there are enough people who will find the Dark Angels being turned into a bunch of weirdos much more interesting than them hiding a legitimately damning secret from the rest of their peers

 

I'd bet it's probably due to the scale of the betrayal that shook the Legion. And the defeat of the Lion too, maybe.

[Slave to Darkness]

There's some evidence that some Chapters in the 40k setting are built from the remnants of Traitor Legions that stayed loyal. Pretty much any Chapter described as being really secretive about their geneseed...

Oh like the Dark Angels ;)

[Augustus]

 

 

There's some evidence that some Chapters in the 40k setting are built from the remnants of Traitor Legions that stayed loyal. Pretty much any Chapter described as being really secretive about their geneseed...

Oh like the Dark Angels ;)

Har har ;)

[Castiel]

 

But if they simply don't want others to know that to them happened what happened with almost every other loyal Legion, then their actions are entirely irrational. But at least there are enough people who will find the Dark Angels being turned into a bunch of weirdos much more interesting than them hiding a legitimately damning secret from the rest of their peers

 

I'd bet it's probably due to the scale of the betrayal that shook the Legion. And the defeat of the Lion too, maybe.

 

Also the fact that by the time they returned from the game of chase they were playing with the Night Lords there were whispers that they had just been hiding and waiting to see who won the heresy. If you came back and everyone already was suspicious of your loyalty, would you really want to reveal that half your legion turned traitor?

[helterskelter]

With the teeny bit of fluff in the new book, I think I'm going to have to paint black shields on my Night Lords. Probably the best way to show loyalty. Love me some really bad guy actually good guy action.

[1ncarnadine]

 

That's a shame. Sounds like someone at GW (or FW) was ignoring the ramifications for the integrity of the established lore again. If more loyalist Legions had units or even full companies side with Chaos, then the entire backstory of the Dark Angels is meaningless. Way to completely deligitimize one of the most famous Chapters of 40K.

 

 

The Dark Angels are also "the First." They have an enormous amount of pride and hold themselves to incredibly exacting behavioral standards, so the fact that a big fat chunk of their legion and their own homeworld went against the Lion was incredibly bad for their psychological wellbeing. To their logic, if any legion should have had no traitors whatsoever, it should have been them, right? But nope, the Lion's childhood buddy even leads the schism. Ouch.

 

They're also naturally secretive and closed-off, so I mean why not hide something that big when you won't even tell anyone your favorite color? (it's pink, all of them, they won't admit it, what if word got out, scandal)

[Kol Saresk]

I think one other thing to point out is that initially, only the Thousand Sons at Prospero are confirmed to have rebelled. But Sons everywhere were hunted down because their Legion leadership and their homeworld rebelled.

 

The Dark Angels' homeworld and their Primarch's right hand man rebelled. And they didn't defeat them. In fact, standing in the ashes, it was their Primarch who had fallen.

 

It isn't just a stain, its a matter of backwards thinking(if where they came from is bad, then they must be too) and quasi-religious explanations(the victor must have the favor of the god-emperor). That's where the Imperium was accelerating to, even at that point. And it only gets worse as the centuries wear on.

 

The Blood Angels and their successors fear persecution if the Black rage and Red Thirst are discovered because it is a mutation that the Imperium would wipe them out for. Just a mutation, a random combination of genetical material resulting in aberrant behavior. Something that literally cannot be controlled.

 

No if the Fallen were ever discovered, more importantly if how they became the Fallen was discovered and if it was ever discovered just how coherent the Unforgiven operate, the Dark Angels and their successors will be hunted down.

 

This is the Imperium of Man. Logic an rationality went out the window long ago. To understand their motivations you have to think like an ignorant, backwaters bigot or you will always be scratching your head. Remember, these are the guys who believe all knowledge corrupts.

[giacomo]

Question on the modern chapters with possible Traitor Legion loyalists....

 

Minotaurs are Iron Warriors, Red Scorpions I thought were rumored to be Word Bearers, Blood Ravens are almost certainly Thousand Sons.... are all of those right or did I miss one in there?

So are Iron Warriors  Minotaurs' progenitors? Always thought that World Eaters way fitted better with Minotaurs behavior, where have you found that information? Thanks

[Legatus]

It isn't just a stain, its a matter of backwards thinking(if where they came from is bad, then they must be too) and quasi-religious explanations(the victor must have the favor of the god-emperor). That's where the Imperium was accelerating to, even at that point. And it only gets worse as the centuries wear on.

 

The Blood Angels and their successors fear persecution if the Black rage and Red Thirst are discovered because it is a mutation that the Imperium would wipe them out for. Just a mutation, a random combination of genetical material resulting in aberrant behavior. Something that literally cannot be controlled.

 

No if the Fallen were ever discovered, more importantly if how they became the Fallen was discovered and if it was ever discovered just how coherent the Unforgiven operate, the Dark Angels and their successors will be hunted down.

 

This is the Imperium of Man. Logic an rationality went out the window long ago. To understand their motivations you have to think like an ignorant, backwaters bigot or you will always be scratching your head. Remember, these are the guys who believe all knowledge corrupts.

 

 

But to us as the outside observer, the actions and the entire identity of the Dark Angels Chapter now appear to be entirely irrational and illegitimate. If they were the only loyalist Legion that had a sizeable number turn to Chaos, then their background is perfectly understandable. But if a lot of the other Legions also had traitors among their ranks, including apparently an entire great company of the Space Wolves, then the Dark Angels' reaction seems petty and an overreaction. The entire Chapter identity, which has persisted for ten thousand years, unwarranted. There are probably still some traitor Space Wolves from the Heresy out there. But the Space Wolves make no particular effort to hunt them all down, do not leave Imperial allies hanging or even attack them if they learn that some of the traitor wolves are nearby, and they are not persecuted by the Imperium for being an unstable and unreliable Chapter. It deligitimizes the actions of the Dark Angels.

[Kol Saresk]

And slaughtering hundreds of thousands of wounded guardsmen just because one Inquisitor discovered the Flaw in the Flesh Tearers is rational?

 

The Space Wolves being "humanitarian" but still killing women and children because they aren't loyal to a corpse, is rational?

 

The very idea of genetically engineered child-soldiers is rational?

 

Literally nothing about 40K is "rational". Not from our perspective. If you want rationality, you have to look at it from their perspective.

 

How well known are those traitors from Loyalist legions? Did the Dark Angels know of them? Does the Imperium at large know of them? That will affect a lot of it.

 

If Forgeworld came out with a Chapter who had their first encounter with the Ordo Malleus and didn't even know the Ordo existed, how many of us would say that was "irrational" and "against canon"? Judging by reactions to similar situations in novels, everyone here should raise a hand and plead guilty. And then feel like someone who has no idea how the background works.

 

Reason being, to us, the Ordo Malleus is well known. In universe, it is one of the best kept secrets in existence.

 

That's how we should assume this is working, until it is stated otherwise. To us, we will be aware of these events at large. In universe, we don't know.

 

So to apply our rationality to it is useless. Because we will be applying it from our point of view and our point of view is incoherent with the rationality of a fictional universe in which most of what we know either is considered a lie, a forgotten truth or an inconvenient fact.

[Legatus]

And slaughtering hundreds of thousands of wounded guardsmen just because one Inquisitor discovered the Flaw in the Flesh Tearers is rational?

 

The Space Wolves being "humanitarian" but still killing women and children because they aren't loyal to a corpse, is rational?

 

The very idea of genetically engineered child-soldiers is rational?

 

 

Yes. All of that is rational in the context of the universe. A Chapter being violent to "allies" to protect their own interest is rational, even if morally questionable. In a reality where thinking the wrong thoughts can condemn an entire world to a horrifying death via torture deamons from hell, killing civilians who might think those thoughts is rational. In a world where war can hit everywhere at any time, and every teenager might be called upon to take up a weapon, selecting a small number to create supreme soldiers is rational.

 

To get an analogy to the Dark Angels situation, when genetic aberrations of Space Marines Chapter were actually quite common and accepted, then the actions of the Flesh tearers would no longer be rational. It only is if they have legitimate reasons for wanting to keep their own aberrations hidden. If there is no reson to do that, then their actions are irrational.

 

If every Legion had traitors during the Horus Heresy, then one Legion going to extreme measures to hide the fact that they also had traitors is irrational.

 

To excuse the actions of the Dark Angels because they were not aware that every other Legion had traitors might work to rationalise their actions in-universe, but it will still make them look like fools to us. If the other loyal Legions had no traitors, then the entire character of the Dark Angels Chapter is legitimate and  warranted. If the other Legions all had traitors, then the character of the Dark Angels Chapter would have no legitimacy, but the Dark Angels just don't know that. Plus, it is highly unlikely that no other Legion knows of the traitors of any of the other Legions. So it would only be the Dark Angels who don't know better, and shape their entire future of ten thousand years based on their ignorance. That would be a serious detriment to the appeal of the Dark Angels.

 

It would be compareable to the Ultramarines lore being changed so that the Codex wasn't really supposed to be strictly adhered to, and they have been doing it wrong the entire time. Take the core of what the Chapter is about, and then strip away any legitimacy and turn it into something foolish. McNeill is continuing to do that to the Ultramarines, and now GW/FW seems to be doing that to the Dark Angels. Only, I am not sure in the case of the Dark Angels that is deliberate. They probably just were not aware of the implication.

[1ncarnadine]

 

Question on the modern chapters with possible Traitor Legion loyalists....

 

Minotaurs are Iron Warriors, Red Scorpions I thought were rumored to be Word Bearers, Blood Ravens are almost certainly Thousand Sons.... are all of those right or did I miss one in there?

So are Iron Warriors  Minotaurs' progenitors? Always thought that World Eaters way fitted better with Minotaurs behavior, where have you found that information? Thanks

 

 

I'm pretty sure the evidence pointed to the Red Scorpions being Emperor's Children and the the Minotaurs being chimerically improved World Eaters? It's left pretty open to interpretation on both counts though.

[blackoption]

 

 

Question on the modern chapters with possible Traitor Legion loyalists....

 

Minotaurs are Iron Warriors, Red Scorpions I thought were rumored to be Word Bearers, Blood Ravens are almost certainly Thousand Sons.... are all of those right or did I miss one in there?

So are Iron Warriors  Minotaurs' progenitors? Always thought that World Eaters way fitted better with Minotaurs behavior, where have you found that information? Thanks

 

 

I'm pretty sure the evidence pointed to the Red Scorpions being Emperor's Children and the the Minotaurs being chimerically improved World Eaters? It's left pretty open to interpretation on both counts though.

 

 

The connection between the Minotaurs and the Iron Warriors stems more from the rules. Fluff wise, the Minotaurs do seem like World Eater Loyalists at first... but both the Minotaurs and Iron Warriors ignore casualties from shooting for their morale checks and the Minotaurs always fight in large chapter formations, often in seige engagements, heedless of the casualties that it causes them.  That is a very Iron Warriors trait.

[Kol Saresk]

 

And slaughtering hundreds of thousands of wounded guardsmen just because one Inquisitor discovered the Flaw in the Flesh Tearers is rational?

 

The Space Wolves being "humanitarian" but still killing women and children because they aren't loyal to a corpse, is rational?

 

The very idea of genetically engineered child-soldiers is rational?

 

Yes. All of that is rational in the context of the universe. A Chapter being violent to "allies" to protect their own interest is rational, even if morally questionable. In a reality where thinking the wrong thoughts can condemn an entire world to a horrifying death via torture deamons from hell, killing civilians who might think those thoughts is rational. In a world where war can hit everywhere at any time, and every teenager might be called upon to take up a weapon, selecting a small number to create supreme soldiers is rational.

 

To get an analogy to the Dark Angels situation, when genetic aberrations of Space Marines Chapter were actually quite common and accepted, then the actions of the Flesh tearers would no longer be rational. It only is if they have legitimate reasons for wanting to keep their own aberrations hidden. If there is no reson to do that, then their actions are irrational.

 

If every Legion had traitors during the Horus Heresy, then one Legion going to extreme measures to hide the fact that they also had traitors is irrational.

 

To follow your analogy, you need to add common knowledge. Traitors all over the place is common knowledge to us, not the Imperium and certainly not the Dark Angels. We are not the Dark Angels. We are not the Imperium. And until we see something that says they know, only we know. Not them. So until they know, it is rational because as far a the Imperium knows, all stayed loyal and as far as the Dark Angels know, only they had Traitors.

 

Unless you have a quote and page number stating the Imperium and/or the Dark Angels are aware?

[Legatus]

Apparently the 4th FW Horus Heresy book has some insight into those instances. So "someone" within the Imperium knows. As I said, if someone else knows but the Dark Angels don't, then their reaction and their entire history from that point on will seem foolish, even if it would be "rational" on a technicality.

 

The Ultramarines seem to think that adhering strictly to the Codex is the way to go. But according to Guilliman according to McNeill, they are totally fwrong about that. And that is uncool.

 

The Dark Angels shaping their entire Chapter and ten thousand years of history just to hide something that had happened to everyone looks daft, and even if the Dark Angels were unaware that that had happened to everyone else, that does not make it much better. They have still been "wrong" for the entire ten thosuand years.

[Kol Saresk]

The Codex has insight into the Fallen. The Crimson slaughter Supplement has insight into the Fallen. So since there's a little insight there, everyone should know already about the Fallen. :whistling:

[No Foes Remain]

There is also a difference between a few hundred traitors in the case of the Raven Guard, White Scars etc and tens of thousands for the Dark Angels.

[Millicant]

I don't think this debate over the "awareness" is that relevant. I've always thought it had more to do with the fact that the Dark Angels didn't discover that half their legion had turned until AFTER the heresy was over. They returned home from a crushing end to the heresy, arriving too late to save their emperor, to have their own fire upon them and ultimately lose their primarch to a war they thought was over, and they thought they had been on the right side of. Devastating.

 

Additionally, the pride of being the First Legion, and having been above doubt or reproach or peers for so many centuries, means that to discover that they also have had brothers turn with Horus is a huge shock. They would never be able to claim their litany of victories because it would be tainted by the fallen.

[Knight of the Raven]

They have still been "wrong" for the entire ten thosuand years.

In the grim darkness of the far future, everyone is wrong. Even the guy who's right. Especially the guy who's right.

Okay, A D-B said it better with "everyone is wrong in different ways," but I like my version more.

[Tymell]

The Ultramarines seem to think that adhering strictly to the Codex is the way to go. But according to Guilliman according to McNeill, they are totally fwrong about that. And that is uncool.

So characters within the setting aren't allowed to have their own viewpoints?

 

Authors aren't allowed to put their own take on things down?

 

This enormous, often deliberately-vague universe and it's history, often seen through the eyes of individuals within it, aren't allowed to have differing interpretations?

 

Very little about the 40K (or 30K) universe is absolute and concrete, even less so when you start talking about the opinions, views or interpretations of individuals -within- that very setting.

 

The Dark Angels shaping their entire Chapter and ten thousand years of history just to hide something that had happened to everyone looks daft

So how many other legions had such a large portion of them turn on the Imperium (and not even due to Horus), including their homeworld essentially seceding, lost said homeworld -and- essentially their primarch over it, and were already rumoured to be holding back during the Heresy and serving their own interests?

 

None. No one else lost their primarch due to treachery within their own legion. No one else suffered an uprising of their own homeworld (that we currently know of), and subsequently lost that homeworld. Some legions had rogue elements or members, but the only ones who had any kind of significant split (again, that we know of so far) were the White Scars, and in their case it was dealt with there and then, didn't have the same sort of massive and long-term repercussions, and I doubt the White Scars would really care much if others knew anyway, such is their own attitude. Certainly not as much as the mighty and noble First Legion. The Scars are already mistrusted and seen as outsiders, and care hardly anything for what others think of them.

 

Again: other members of other legions joining Horus is not the same as what happened to the Dark Angels. Book IV even explicitly states that instances of parts of loyalist legions turning traitor is very much a matter of rumour and hearsay, with so much unknown of what really might have happened.

[Legatus]

The Codex has insight into the Fallen. The Crimson slaughter Supplement has insight into the Fallen. So since there's a little insight there, everyone should know already about the Fallen.

That is actually a pretty good example of how Codices are often written with an omniscious perspective, while the Horus Heresy FW books are intentionally written from a very limited point of view. When the Codex Dark Angels tells us that only the Grand Master knows about Lutehr being held deep within the Rock, and that only the Emperor knows that even deeper within the Rock the Watchers are guarding the body of Jonson (see current Codex p. 26), then that clearly is not taken from the official Administratum report on the Dark Angels Chapter. It isn't even taken from highly classified archives of the Inquisition. No one in the 40K Universe could tell us this. The Horus Heresy FW books on the other hand are written from a contemporary perspective, not knowing whatever will happen as the Heresy will further unfold.

So characters within the setting aren't allowed to have their own viewpoints?

Authors aren't allowed to put their own take on things down?

If it invalidates the core character of a Chapter, then I'd rather they didn't.

[Kol Saresk]

And you just proved my point why it is worthless to freak out about it. Because only one scribe knows of these events. One scribe among trillions. In an institution that is constantly going "No one needs to know this" before throwing more kindling into the hearth.

 

That information you are assuming to be common knowledge, won't be. Even i it is uncommon.

 

Also, Codices still aren't omniscient. Case in point, the CS only know because they encountered, captured and tortured a Fallen to fin out who he was because their Librarian's visions led them to him.

 

If they were omniscient, then again, it would be no big deal because everyone would magically know.

 

Either way it goes, freaking out is worthless until something explicit is stated that justifies freaking out.

[Castiel]

The Codex has insight into the Fallen. The Crimson slaughter Supplement has insight into the Fallen. So since there's a little insight there, everyone should know already about the Fallen.

That is actually a pretty good example of how Codices are often written with an omniscious perspective, while the Horus Heresy FW books are intentionally written from a very limited point of view. When the Codex Dark Angels tells us that only the Grand Master knows about Lutehr being held deep within the Rock, and that only the Emperor knows that even deeper within the Rock the Watchers are guarding the body of Jonson (see current Codex p. 26), then that clearly is not taken from the official Administratum report on the Dark Angels Chapter. It isn't even taken from highly classified archives of the Inquisition. No one in the 40K Universe could tell us this. The Horus Heresy FW books on the other hand are written from a contemporary perspective, not knowing whatever will happen as the Heresy will further unfold.

So characters within the setting aren't allowed to have their own viewpoints?

Authors aren't allowed to put their own take on things down?

If it invalidates the core character of a Chapter, then I'd rather they didn't.

I don't think that the quote from Guilliman invalidates the core of the UM at all. I took it more as a "Look, I'm still writing this thing so there are likely to be flaws, use your own initiative and tactical insight to cover. Oh, and also, even though I'm a demi-god of incredible intelligence you are going to come across situations and foes that I cannot account for. Use the Codex to guide your combat doctrines, but be prepared to improvise if necessary."

Think of it as cooking a meal, the Codex provides the meat and veg of your tactics, but individual situations may call for a bit of your own embellishment or improvisation, like using different herbs or spices depending on your guest. (not a great analogy, but I hope you understand)

[KBA]

I don't think this debate over the "awareness" is that relevant. I've always thought it had more to do with the fact that the Dark Angels didn't discover that half their legion had turned until AFTER the heresy was over. They returned home from a crushing end to the heresy, arriving too late to save their emperor, to have their own fire upon them and ultimately lose their primarch to a war they thought was over, and they thought they had been on the right side of. Devastating.

 

Additionally, the pride of being the First Legion, and having been above doubt or reproach or peers for so many centuries, means that to discover that they also have had brothers turn with Horus is a huge shock. They would never be able to claim their litany of victories because it would be tainted by the fallen.

 

This^

 

Anyone who thinks traitors in other loyal legions compromises the Dark Angels and their story needs to get more familiarized with the them, or take the melting of their unique-snow-flake loyalist traitors a little less personally IMO. This is civil war. If other legions didn't have their own turn coats, my intelligence would have been insulted.