Story expectations in a world that doesn't change?

[1000 Sons]

This idea came to me after reading Unforgiven, the Dark Angels novel, and some one said the ending kind of fell apart and nothing really happen.  This made me think of the upcoming Ahriman book as well, it is safe to say the Rubric won't be cured, and the book will end with nothing having changed from the first book of the trilogy.

 

I know this is nothing new to 40k novels that involve the big characters for the game, but is it just some thing that everyone is used to reading that the good guys win, and the bad guys are always sent back to the warp waiting for the next Acme World Destroying Plan to try on the next attempt ?

 

How would you feel if the stories weren't connected to each other? So Cyper, Ahriman, or Khârn could die, or kill another enemy big name, and that would be contained in one novel and then another novel could ignore those outcomes and reuse characters.

[Teetengee]

That would be interesting, and firmly establish loose canon to boot.

[Apothecary Vaddon]

Well, the next novel is entitled Ahriman: Unchanged, sooooooo.....

[Scribe]

I would hate, unequivocally, if a BL book changed the major players of 40K, and then another one ignored it.

 

I actually cannot articulate the level of utter rage and despair I would feel over that. 

[Lucien Eilam]

The point of those series isn't to change things. It's to show how those characters got to be the way they are. The end of the story doesn't have to be a mystery to make the journey worthwhile.

 

How would you feel if the stories weren't connected to each other? So Cyper, Ahriman, or Khârn could die, or kill another enemy big name, and that would be contained in one novel and then another novel could ignore those outcomes and reuse characters.

 

 

What would be the point? There are thousands of years and an entire galaxy's worth of Chaos Champions for them to write about. The named characters from the rules are archetypes, not the be-all and end-all of the setting.

 

They're not Marvel or DC. They're allowed to have a new idea more than once every three decades.

[1000 Sons]

The point for me atleast is that I don't want the archetypes, I want the original.  Seeing Typhus or Khârn actually getting something completed.

 

Currently I feel BL is exactly like the comic books, for the past ten years it has been it has been the victorious gaunt, ciaphus, loyalist legion etc.  A new idea would be what  I said, having self contained stories that don't have an impact on the actual 40k world or setting.

 

I also agree some times the journey more interesting then the end.  I would like a 40k story where I don't automatically feel like I am reading an roadrunner and coyote episode where the end of the story is always the same situation as it was in the beginning. 

[Scribe]

All of that can happen without impacting central characters within the setting (note: Setting, not Story) and causing others like myself to have seizure. :]

 

EDIT: To be clear, Khârn could destroy a world, have adventures in the Eye, do whatever it is Khârn does on a daily basis, without getting offed or something to 'shake up' a story that doesnt need it.

[Jareddm]

The point for me atleast is that I don't want the archetypes, I want the original.  Seeing Typhus or Khârn actually getting something completed.

 

Currently I feel BL is exactly like the comic books, for the past ten years it has been it has been the victorious gaunt, ciaphus, loyalist legion etc.  A new idea would be what  I said, having self contained stories that don't have an impact on the actual 40k world or setting.

 

I also agree some times the journey more interesting then the end.  I would like a 40k story where I don't automatically feel like I am reading an roadrunner and coyote episode where the end of the story is always the same situation as it was in the beginning. 

Isn't this exactly what's being done with Ahriman, Khârn, and Abaddon in their respective stories?  All of them take place during the Age of Rebirth.  They're still thousands of years from present day.  Yes, we know where they end up, but in those interevening years, they can have all the success you want.  Hundreds of worlds conquered, pulled into the warp, only for the Inquisition to quietly remind everyone that those worlds never existed in the first place.  People forget that in the intervening years between the Heresy and M41, it's not that nothing happened.  It's that the Imperium doesn't want its people to remember what happened.

[b1soul]

the good guys win, and the bad guys are always sent back to the warp waiting for the next Acme World Destroying Plan to try on the next attempt ?

 

I wouldn't really say that

 

The current situation is a stalemate between the IoM and its enemies, with the IoM's enemies slowly gaining ground. 

 

The IoM is able to avert catastrophe...but it isn't able to stop it's steady decline. The IoM's victories usually consist of containment or successful defense. The IoM hasn't really been able to crush its enemies since the Scouring. 

[Wulfkry]

With unforgiven and the upcoming ahriman book it seems to fit in with the overall theme of the 40k setting.  Grimdark and stagnant.  Try as our characters might everything they do no matter how monumental their feats may be it is in the end futile.  It all stays the same no matter what they do... damn thats bloody depressing..

[b1soul]

With unforgiven and the upcoming ahriman book it seems to fit in with the overall theme of the 40k setting.  Grimdark and stagnant.  Try as our characters might everything they do no matter how monumental their feats may be it is in the end futile.  It all stays the same no matter what they do... damn thats bloody depressing..

 

Games Workshop is in the business of selling miniatures 

 

They won't advance the setting unless it helps to sell miniatures. Sad but true

[RapatoR]

Rome falls, Napoleon loses, Hitler dies, the outcome is clear, yet we see a lot of interesting stories from respective periods

[Vesper]

That's precisely why I'm all in AD-B's Black Legion series.

The 40k timeline is an empty glass, and there are tons of events we know next to nothing about. And I'm not talking about insignificant little dots in history, I'm talkink abou the Legion Wars in the Eye, the Black Crusades of Abaddon and those from other insanely powerful and successful warlords, how about the guys who friggin slayed Rogal Dorn ?

Keep in mind Calgar, Dante, Lysander and all that jazz are nothing more than the defenders of the imperium at the end of the Dark Millenium, they are the tip of the comet tail, there were countless generations of warriors that stood in their place before them. We only know them because, ultimately, the cursor of the game is set to M40, but they are just as important as any Chapter Master that was holding the title before them. So sure, bad guys won in droves. You don't survive 10k years in that galaxy by losing a lot, even more so if you're on the Chaos side of things, because the Chaos gods are less inclined to tolerate failure than the High Lords of Terra. The single fact Abaddon, Typhus, Fabius, Arhiman... are still there is already a testament to their (untold) successes.

 

You're right in saying that when we read about Calgar, a story loses much of its interest and there's a trend that could make us think the Imperium is going well and all at the end of the millenium when it's supposed to be losing ground and losing to the point of crumbling under the pressure of countless threats, but hey. There was that debate about the loss of grimdarkness in the Grim and Dark Future, ultimately it's up to each author's choice, so there aren't much to do about it but to wait for those authors who fill the empty glass and give us more about the tales of good and bad guys that defy the pattern of codex filler like : "Marneus Calgar wins because he is stong and skilled and Ultramarine" and give some depth and nuance to the background.

[1000 Sons]

I do agree that there is a lot we haven't been told about the 10k years between heresy and 13 black crusade.  The thing is we never get those stories, so we continue with the same pattern of stories.

 

The black legion book was great, because it was set in a time where anything can happen.  Abbadon and co. can stomp all over the imperium and win every battle because it really doesn't matter and has no effect on the current setting, this can be done with all the big chaos lords and hopefully if the Black Legion stories do will give black library some new ways of portraying the traitor legions in a way that shows how potent they are without any change to the 40k universe. 

[Captain_Loken]

I think they can do an entire story on how the chaos Legion's numbers continue to stay positive after the HH and through all of Abaddon's 13 Crusades.

 

Honestly, I have been trying to keep up with the numbers, and it seems like they have more than the Loyalists. 
 

I feel crazy for not being able to string this into a larger argument, but I'm not sure much else needs to be said... just think about it.

[Carrack]

I have to disagree with the premise that the BL should go back and flesh out more of the 10,000 years of history. I think if they do, they will just be doing the same thing that they have done with the Horus Heresy, and my problem with the Heresy is I know how it will end. Spoiler

Horus and half of the legions fall to chaos, attack Terra, are defeated by the loyal legions at great cost, and the surviving traitors are driven off.

I know they can flesh out the details, develop characters, give motives, and many other things with the Heresy novels, or any other "historical era" novels, but they cannot change the basic outcome. There is no suspense, nothing hangs in the balance.

 

Now the same can be said about the 40k novels, the story will not progress beyond a certain point, but actions that take place in 40k can still affect the future, even if we will never read about it.

 

Furthermore, part of the appeal of the 40k setting is the rich and mysterious history, mostly half forgotten myths and legends. The more the BL writes on the history of its settings, the less mysterious and unique that history becomes.

[Jareddm]

 I know they can flesh out the details, develop characters, give motives, and many other things with the Heresy novels, or any other "historical era" novels, but they cannot change the basic outcome. There is no suspense, nothing hangs in the balance.

Disagree completely.  Dozens of sectors, hundreds of worlds, and untold numbers of men, marines, and monsters have had great impact upon the galaxy, only to be wiped out and any evidence of their existence purged from history.  Just because it doesn't show up on a timeline or hasn't been mentioned before doesn't mean it wasn't vitally important at the time.  It only means that the Imperium has moved past it.  The Nova Terra Interregnum literally saw the entire Imperium split in half for 900 years!  And yet by M41, all that's known is, "Oh, it happened.  But then things got better."

 

Furthermore, part of the appeal of the 40k setting is the rich and mysterious history, mostly half forgotten myths and legends. The more the BL writes on the history of its settings, the less mysterious and unique that history becomes.

 

What you're forgetting are all of the COMPLETELY forgotten myths and legends.  There will always be half forgotten stuff.  The whole point of having 10,000 years and a million worlds to work with is we don't know how much we don't know.  They could put out a full novel trilogy completely focused on a single sub-sector's worth of planets set in the middle of the Age of Apostasy, with all of the political intrigue, civil wars, astartes intervention, and xenos incursions that entails and we would have no idea going into it whether those planets will be swallowed up by the warp thanks to cultist activity or whether they'll go on to become the homeworld for a new chapter whose origins we previously never knew.

[Carrack]

Ultimately it's a matter of scale for me. In reading about the history of the setting, in spite of the fate of the Imperium hanging in the balance during events such as the Age of Apostasy, we as readers know the condition that the Imperium will be in in the year 40,000. We know Vandire will be overthrown. In the 41st Millenium, we don't know if Abaddon will reach Terra, we don't know if the Hive Fleets will devour the Galaxy, we don't know if the awakening Necrons will cleanse all life from their former empires.

 

In any event its a matter of personal preference and mine differs from yours, and I would guess the majority of Black Library readers. I just see the amount of effort going into the historical eras of the setting as taking away authors' time from my preferred modern era, and on one hand enriching the modern era with backstory, but on the other hand dispelling some of the mystique. An entirely selfish opinion of mine, for sure.

[Captain_Loken]

Carrack, I truly think it's you and people like you, that Black Library and it's monopoly are trying to sell to. They fear the people that ask too many questions. They can't control their wallets when they dare to ask questions!

 

It's much easier selling the same story over and over to someone that doesn't really care about story line, because the 41st millennium is so vast, that anything is possible!

 

As you say, a difference in opinion.  Just remember it's not bad to ask questions.

[A D-B]

Ultimately it's a matter of scale for me. In reading about the history of the setting, in spite of the fate of the Imperium hanging in the balance during events such as the Age of Apostasy, we as readers know the condition that the Imperium will be in in the year 40,000. We know Vandire will be overthrown. In the 41st Millenium, we don't know if Abaddon will reach Terra, we don't know if the Hive Fleets will devour the Galaxy, we don't know if the awakening Necrons will cleanse all life from their former empires.

 

In any event its a matter of personal preference and mine differs from yours, and I would guess the majority of Black Library readers. I just see the amount of effort going into the historical eras of the setting as taking away authors' time from my preferred modern era, and on one hand enriching the modern era with backstory, but on the other hand dispelling some of the mystique. An entirely selfish opinion of mine, for sure.

 

There's wisdom in this, but I think it's a matter of scale to everyone. F'rex, when I think of the setting for Warhammer 40,000, I think of the Dark Millennium. It's the one thousand years where the Imperium's decline truly takes hold, when the edges of the empire start to go dark, when the predations of the alien races intensify tenfold and Chaos rises again, and again, and again, in threats evermore insidious and barbaric, increasingly vast in scale.

 

The 9,000 years between the Dark Millennium and the Horus Heresy were full of some truly horrendous wars, many of which will have been so vast and vile that they'll have been banished from Imperial record, much like the Heresy was. But the setting itself, the Dark Millennium, is when things really, truly start to go sour. The Horus Heresy is the end of the beginning. The Dark Millennium is the beginning of the end.

 

One of the phrases I like least in all of 40K fandom is "advancing the storyline". It speaks to me of a critical divergence in opinion and perception. Not wrong, because I don't think anyone can be wrong about this stuff, but it's so far from the perception I have of the setting, and the enjoyment I take from it, that it's pretty alien to me. Can you tell interesting stories in M42? Of course. But demanding it "advance" is being annoyed at a cat for not barking and wagging its tail like a dog. it's not a storyline. It's a setting. I'm not the world's smartest guy by any means, but in 20+ years of loving 40K I've never felt constrained by the incredibly broad boundaries of even a single century in the Dark Millennium, let alone the entire thousand years of it - and that's not even considering the 9,000 years before it. When I play in campaigns my group doesn't set them on the edge of M42, in that final year as the 13th Black Crusade is kicking off. We set them at whatever point within the Dark Millennium that seems interesting, has something related, or conversely is entirely untouched. 

 

So much happens in M41. So much goes wrong. So many wars tear the galaxy apart, night by night, eating at humanity's territory in an inexorable, inevitable journey to the Throneworld. To me, Warhammer 40,000 is set in the one thousand years of absolute, brutal devastation that starts to take hold of the Imperium. That last, dark millennium when Mankind rages against the dying of the light. 

[A D-B]

This idea came to me after reading Unforgiven, the Dark Angels novel, and some one said the ending kind of fell apart and nothing really happen.  This made me think of the upcoming Ahriman book as well, it is safe to say the Rubric won't be cured, and the book will end with nothing having changed from the first book of the trilogy.

 

In defence of Ahriman, that's literally the core of his existence and the crux his journey. It's the tragedy behind him as a character. He does terrible, evil things believing it's all ultimately to do good, not realising how selfish he's being. He thinks, every single time, that this time he's found a way to make it all work, that he's free of Tzeentch's manipulations, which is the very way Tzeentch manipulates him. He's the pawn that believes he'll be king if he can just reach the other side of the board.

 

Characters like that, as playthings of the gods that believe they're free, have been solid gold storytelling fodder for thousands of years. Odysseus, Achilles, Sisyphus, Orpheus... There's a reason these tropes live on today.

[1000 Sons]

Is it wrong to feel all warm and giggly that A D-B responded to a post I made ?  Are we friends now ?  Do you also live and die with Cork hurling ?

[1000 Sons]

Characters like that, as playthings of the gods that believe they're free, have been solid gold storytelling fodder for thousands of years. Odysseus, Achilles, Sisyphus, Orpheus... There's a reason these tropes live on today.

One thing about these characters is that Odysseus made it back to Ithaca, Achilles died in battle, Sisyphus finally was dead and with his boulder, and even Orpheus finally meets his end. The current 40k big names never have that ending.

 

Imagine you were given 2 choices, End the Black Legion story at the current point in 40k, Abaddon is ready to launch the 13th crusade and the story ends. The 2nd option have the 13th crusade make it right to Terra and destroy the golden throne and defeat the loyalist legions, but your next book (or some one else's) would be the opposite, the 13th crusde is stopped, Abaddon and his generals are killed.

 

In the big picture does it really change anything ? The story ends with no change to the 40k setting, or you get some change that really doesn't matter since it can be redone in any other book.

[A D-B]

 

Characters like that, as playthings of the gods that believe they're free, have been solid gold storytelling fodder for thousands of years. Odysseus, Achilles, Sisyphus, Orpheus... There's a reason these tropes live on today.

One thing about these characters is that Odysseus made it back to Ithaca, Achilles died in battle, Sisyphus finally was dead and with his boulder, and even Orpheus finally meets his end. The current 40k big names never have that ending.

 

 

Because they were stories. If they were settings for a game where tens of thousands of people were supposed to invent their own sectors and niches to play their own campaigns and battles, the setting would be set while those characters were doing all of their amazing deeds, not when they were on the downslide in peace time afterwards.

 

And that would be right, because that's where the interesting parts of those characters' lives are. That's when you want to tell stories about them, not when they're dead or happily retired. You'd set a game about Mythic Greece in a way that let you rub shoulders with the heroes while they were doing stuff, and you'd tell tales (as people did indeed tell tales) of those characters' deeds. 

 

I suspect most people don't even know how 90% of the heroic Greek myths end, but they know what happened on most of the journeys.

 

Ultimately, I don't care what happens to Ahriman. The inherent tragedy of his existence is that he's denied what he wants, and each time he comes close it's a Monkey's Paw type of situation where it  goes wrong. That's mythic tragedy. That's what interests me. I don't read novels for information on events in the setting, I read them for what it's like to live in the setting itself, and to see what those characters experience at the famous/interesting moments of their lives. Ahriman curing the Rubric, as an example, holds no interest to me, and literally defeats the point of his character's tragic fate. Ahriman trying to fix the Rubric, alternating between facing up to what he's done and trying to justify it - that's interesting. The things he'll do on the quest to fix it while being thwarted by the deities he believes he can break free from - that's revealing, interesting, and cool. That's the kind of stuff I care about.

 

EDIT: For clarity, I'm not saying any one way is wrong. Some games work great with a metaplot, and it can be an energising, motivating thing. It's not something I've ever felt 40K lacked though, in 25+ years of knowing the setting about as well as anyone can, so I struggle to engage when people say they see a need for it now.  

[Scribe]

 

Characters like that, as playthings of the gods that believe they're free, have been solid gold storytelling fodder for thousands of years. Odysseus, Achilles, Sisyphus, Orpheus... There's a reason these tropes live on today.

Imagine you were given 2 choices, End the Black Legion story at the current point in 40k, Abaddon is ready to launch the 13th crusade and the story ends. The 2nd option have the 13th crusade make it right to Terra and destroy the golden throne and defeat the loyalist legions, but your next book (or some one else's) would be the opposite, the 13th crusde is stopped, Abaddon and his generals are killed.

 

 

2nd option sounds absolutely horrible. Unfathomably bad as it would ruin the setting, for the sake of a story.