Wolf King Spoilers and Discussion

[Legatus]

the Wolves tally of victories have been retconned from being comparable to Horus, to relatively few.

Now that is pretty serious.

However, each action was said to have been shocking in its brutality without comparison.

So Chris Wraight hasn't heard of the World Eaters either? I feel GW should require their authors to read up on all the established Legions before they allow them to reinvent one of them.

As far as Guiliman hating Alpharius, why shouldn't he?

It is probably based on a biased interpretation on Dan Abnett's side. (surprise) IIRC there had already been a scene in "Legion" where Alpharius remarks that Guilliman despises him while he just ignores Guilliman.

That is probably based on a biased reading of the Index Astartes article, where a debate between Guilliman and Alpharius was described as "heated", and ended with Guilliman remarking that the Alpha Legion could never hope to match the Ultramarines' successes if he insisted on his own doctrines.

I imagine that Abnett read that as Guilliman storming off huffing and puffing while Alpharius just shrugged and remained all cool. However, that would be to dismiss how both Primarchs conducted themselves after that encounter:

Guilliman...

- ...went on to do his business as usual.

Alpharius...

- ...pushed his Legion even harder than before to prove their worth.

- ...turned traitor just so the Alpha Legion could face off against other Space Marine forces.

- ...deliberately steered his Legion towards the Ultima Segmentum during the Heresy, possibly to seek a confrontation with the Ultramarines.

That kind of makes it seem more like it wasn't Guilliman who had a strong emotional reaction to their meeting.

[Marshal Rohr]

the Wolves tally of victories have been retconned from being comparable to Horus, to relatively few.

Now that is pretty serious.

However, each action was said to have been shocking in its brutality without comparison.

So Chris Wraight hasn't heard of the World Eaters either? I feel GW should require their authors to read up on all the established Legions before they allow them to reinvent one of them.

As far as Guiliman hating Alpharius, why shouldn't he?

It is probably based on a biased interpretation on Dan Abnett's side. (surprise) IIRC there had already been a scene in "Legion" where Alpharius remarks that Guilliman despises him while he just ignores Guilliman.

That is probably based on a biased reading of the Index Astartes article, where a debate between Guilliman and Alpharius was described as "heated", and ended with Guilliman remarking that the Alpha Legion could never hope to match the Ultramarines' successes if he insisted on his own doctrines.

I imagine that Abnett read that as Guilliman storming off huffing and puffing while Alpharius just shrugged and remained all cool. However, that would be to dismiss how both Primarchs conducted themselves after that encounter:

Guilliman...

- ...went on to do his business as usual.

Alpharius...

- ...pushed his Legion even harder than before to prove their worth.

- ...turned traitor just so the Alpha Legion could face off against other Space Marine forces.

- ...deliberately steered his Legion towards the Ultima Segmentum during the Heresy, possibly to seek a confrontation with the Ultramarines.

That kind of makes it seem more like it wasn't Guilliman who had a strong emotional reaction to their meeting.

Clearly it can be extrapolated from what Russ says that Guilliman must've been vocal or demonstrative in his dislike of Alpharius.

[Marshal Rohr]

the Wolves tally of victories have been retconned from being comparable to Horus, to relatively few.

Now that is pretty serious.

However, each action was said to have been shocking in its brutality without comparison.

So Chris Wraight hasn't heard of the World Eaters either? I feel GW should require their authors to read up on all the established Legions before they allow them to reinvent one of them.

I think Wraight means to imply the Wolves did things that the World Eaters would've been incapable of doing because of their implants. No one can really fault the World Eaters because they don't exactly have the ability to control it, and they don't know what they were doing. The Wolves knew exactly what they were doing the whole time.

As far as Guiliman hating Alpharius, why shouldn't he?

It is probably based on a biased interpretation on Dan Abnett's side. (surprise) IIRC there had already been a scene in "Legion" where Alpharius remarks that Guilliman despises him while he just ignores Guilliman.

That is probably based on a biased reading of the Index Astartes article, where a debate between Guilliman and Alpharius was described as "heated", and ended with Guilliman remarking that the Alpha Legion could never hope to match the Ultramarines' successes if he insisted on his own doctrines.

I imagine that Abnett read that as Guilliman storming off huffing and puffing while Alpharius just shrugged and remained all cool. However, that would be to dismiss how both Primarchs conducted themselves after that encounter:

Guilliman...

- ...went on to do his business as usual.

Alpharius...

- ...pushed his Legion even harder than before to prove their worth.

- ...turned traitor just so the Alpha Legion could face off against other Space Marine forces.

- ...deliberately steered his Legion towards the Ultima Segmentum during the Heresy, possibly to seek a confrontation with the Ultramarines.

That kind of makes it seem more like it wasn't Guilliman who had a strong emotional reaction to their meeting.

Clearly it can be extrapolated from what Russ says that Guilliman must've been vocal or demonstrative in his dislike of Alpharius.

[Kol Saresk]

the Wolves tally of victories have been retconned from being comparable to Horus, to relatively few.

Now that is pretty serious.

Not really. Nothing in the Space Wolves' index article says they had a record comparable to Horus, just the usual tidbit about conquering thousands of planets, which is pretty much in every Index article.

However, each action was said to have been shocking in its brutality without comparison.

So Chris Wraight hasn't heard of the World Eaters either? I feel GW should require their authors to read up on all the established Legions before they allow them to reinvent one of them.

I think Wraight means to imply the Wolves did things that the World Eaters would've been incapable of doing because of their implants. No one can really fault the World Eaters because they don't exactly have the ability to control it, and they don't know what they were doing. The Wolves knew exactly what they were doing the whole time.

Pretty much what I was thinking. Even as the War Hounds, the XII Legion was taught to be brutally excessive and whatever control they had was destroyed by the Nails.

As far as Guiliman hating Alpharius, why shouldn't he?

It is probably based on a biased interpretation on Dan Abnett's side. (surprise) IIRC there had already been a scene in "Legion" where Alpharius remarks that Guilliman despises him while he just ignores Guilliman.

That is probably based on a biased reading of the Index Astartes article, where a debate between Guilliman and Alpharius was described as "heated", and ended with Guilliman remarking that the Alpha Legion could never hope to match the Ultramarines' successes if he insisted on his own doctrines.

I imagine that Abnett read that as Guilliman storming off huffing and puffing while Alpharius just shrugged and remained all cool. However, that would be to dismiss how both Primarchs conducted themselves after that encounter:

Guilliman...

- ...went on to do his business as usual.

Alpharius...

- ...pushed his Legion even harder than before to prove their worth.

- ...turned traitor just so the Alpha Legion could face off against other Space Marine forces.

- ...deliberately steered his Legion towards the Ultima Segmentum during the Heresy, possibly to seek a confrontation with the Ultramarines.

That kind of makes it seem more like it wasn't Guilliman who had a strong emotional reaction to their meeting.

Clearly it can be extrapolated from what Russ says that Guilliman must've been vocal or demonstrative in his dislike of Alpharius.

Yeah, hate can have a variety of meanings and all it would mean in this context is that, as Russ saw it, Guilliman hated Alpharius whereas Russ just saw Alpharius as a nothing.

[Legatus]

Yes, clearly the Guilliman of the Horus Heresy series has a strong dislike or even hatred for Alpharius. The question is where the authors got that from. The Index Astartes suggested the opposite of what Dan Abnett had described in "Legion", which is probably what Chris Wraith based his description on.

 

 

I think Wraight means to imply the Wolves did things that the World Eaters would've been incapable of doing because of their implants. No one can really fault the World Eaters because they don't exactly have the ability to control it, and they don't know what they were doing. The Wolves knew exactly what they were doing the whole time.

 

So the conduct of the Space Wolves is shocking in its brutality without comparison... so long as we discount the World Eaters? Without comparison... among the sane Legions. Is that it?

 

 

"Of all the Legions of the Great Crusade, none were so savage and dreaded. For while others such as the Night Lords could justly claim to have brought worlds into compliance by fear alone, and others such as the White Scars and the Space Wolves could descend without warning and leave a world burning in their wake, for the World Eaters to be assigned to a campaign meant only one thing for the enemy - extermination."

- HH1: Betrayal, p. 84

 

"The World Eaters became a byword for unbridled violence and slaughter on a grand scale, shunned by many of their fellow Legions for their excesses and whispered of in fear by those who in theory they had been created to protect. (...)

(...) more than once non-compliant planetary systems surrendered wholesale at the rumour of the World Eaters' approach, so potent had their bloody legend grown.

With this legend came dark tales of atrocity and wanton destruction that froze the blood of even hardened Imperial Commanders and caused concern even at the level of the War Council and the other Primarchs. Not least of their detractors was Roboute Guilliman, Primarch of the Ultramarines, who fought beside Angron and his Legion during the Cleansing of Ariggata and saw first hand the bloodbath they had left in the wake of their attack on the Basalt Citadel, where the last resistance of this non-compliant human world had made their stand."

- HH1: Betrayal, p. 88

 

So much for the violent reputation of the World Eaters. Even the Space Wolves tried to rein them in at one point. Who, by the way, are fine with Guilliman, being among his "dauntless few", all while he is objecting to the World Eaters' excessive brutality.

 

 

Not really. Nothing in the Space Wolves' index article says they had a record comparable to Horus, just the usual tidbit about conquering thousands of planets, which is pretty much in every Index article.

 

"If Jonson was quiet he was also brave and a mighty leader of men. During the Great Crusade only he and Horus achieved a greater tally of victories than Russ. Russ, ever concerned with his honour and good name, and ever keen to tell the noble saga of his deeds, found this exasperating."

- 2nd Edition Codex Angels of Death, p. 67

 

The same is repeated in the 3rd Edition Dark Angels Index Astartes article (Index Astartes Volume I, p. 20) and the 4th Edition Codex Dark Angels (p. 20). It was rephrased for the 6th Edition Codex Dark Angels, where it now only points out that Jonson had more victories than Russ (p. 9). The description of the account in the 7th Edition Codex Dark Angels was further shortened, and now does not mention victories as a cause for animosity at all.

[Kol Saresk]

So you're basing that on the Dark Angels, the Chapter so covered up in lies that even members of the Inner Circle don't know the entire truth of Caliban. Well if that's what you want to do.

 

Also, remind me how the Space Wolves Index Astartes article says the bit between Russ and the Lion came about?

[Marshal Rohr]

Yes, clearly the Guilliman of the Horus Heresy series has a strong dislike or even hatred for Alpharius. The question is where the authors got that from. The Index Astartes suggested the opposite of what Dan Abnett had described in "Legion", which is probably what Chris Wraith based his description on.

 

 

I think Wraight means to imply the Wolves did things that the World Eaters would've been incapable of doing because of their implants. No one can really fault the World Eaters because they don't exactly have the ability to control it, and they don't know what they were doing. The Wolves knew exactly what they were doing the whole time.

So the conduct of the Space Wolves is shocking in its brutality without comparison... so long as we discount the World Eaters? Without comparison... among the sane Legions. Is that it?

 

 

 

"Of all the Legions of the Great Crusade, none were so savage and dreaded. For while others such as the Night Lords could justly claim to have brought worlds into compliance by fear alone, and others such as the White Scars and the Space Wolves could descend without warning and leave a world burning in their wake, for the World Eaters to be assigned to a campaign meant only one thing for the enemy - extermination."

- HH1: Betrayal, p. 84

"The World Eaters became a byword for unbridled violence and slaughter on a grand scale, shunned by many of their fellow Legions for their excesses and whispered of in fear by those who in theory they had been created to protect. (...)

(...) more than once non-compliant planetary systems surrendered wholesale at the rumour of the World Eaters' approach, so potent had their bloody legend grown.

With this legend came dark tales of atrocity and wanton destruction that froze the blood of even hardened Imperial Commanders and caused concern even at the level of the War Council and the other Primarchs. Not least of their detractors was Roboute Guilliman, Primarch of the Ultramarines, who fought beside Angron and his Legion during the Cleansing of Ariggata and saw first hand the bloodbath they had left in the wake of their attack on the Basalt Citadel, where the last resistance of this non-compliant human world had made their stand."

- HH1: Betrayal, p. 88

So much for the violent reputation of the World Eaters. Even the Space Wolves tried to rein them in at one point. Who, by the way, are fine with Guilliman, being among his "dauntless few", all while he is objecting to the World Eaters' excessive brutality.

 

Not really. Nothing in the Space Wolves' index article says they had a record comparable to Horus, just the usual tidbit about conquering thousands of planets, which is pretty much in every Index article.

"If Jonson was quiet he was also brave and a mighty leader of men. During the Great Crusade only he and Horus achieved a greater tally of victories than Russ. Russ, ever concerned with his honour and good name, and ever keen to tell the noble saga of his deeds, found this exasperating."

- 2nd Edition Codex Angels of Death, p. 67

The same is repeated in the 3rd Edition Dark Angels Index Astartes article (Index Astartes Volume I, p. 20) and the 4th Edition Codex Dark Angels (p. 20). It was rephrased for the 6th Edition Codex Dark Angels, where it now only points out that Jonson had more victories than Russ (p. 9). The description of the account in the 7th Edition Codex Dark Angels was further shortened, and now does not mention victories as a cause for animosity at all.

I'm saying we won't know if the comparisons between the Space Wolves and World Eaters are appropriate until we get the new FW background article in Inferno. You can't convict a man missing half the evidence.

 

Edit: Although we are not privy to the information yet, these authors are all aware of how each legion will be presented by FW. Meaning, the things that have changed from the IA articles are currently being revealed by BL and FW will cement them into the background with their books. Using 2nd Editions and Index Astartes is now completely pointless, unless you are angling for a facet of a legion unaddressed by FW or BL (see IF Junker model), since it seems anything not explicitly changed still applies to canon these days.

[Son of Carnelian]

Different authors are also allowed to put their stamp on the Warhammer universe. You're citing stuff from Warhammer's past like any of those are actually verifiable accounts. The appeal of this fictional universe is that no account is more authoritative than another and everything in the universe is a rumor, mistake, offhand account, or forgotten text. 

 

Jeez. Just looking at that list of cited sources scares me. How could anyone write anything in Warhammer if it had such strict canon? (See Star Wars for an example.) 

[Emperor's Furor]

There's a lot of contradictions in the lore to be fair, I remember reading the Imperial Fists had a large number of victories close to the most but was cut short due to returning to Terra.

[Fire Golem]

It's safe to assume Guilliman doesn't like Alpharius now though after UE :p

 

Well yeah :P but I assume Russ meant Guilliman hated Alpharius before the heresy, otherwise it goes without saying that the Loyalists would've hated the Traitors after the treachery ;)

[Marshal Rohr]

Different authors are also allowed to put their stamp on the Warhammer universe. You're citing stuff from Warhammer's past like any of those are actually verifiable accounts. The appeal of this fictional universe is that no account is more authoritative than another and everything in the universe is a rumor, mistake, offhand account, or forgotten text.

 

Jeez. Just looking at that list of cited sources scares me. How could anyone write anything in Warhammer if it had such strict canon? (See Star Wars for an example.)

This isn't entirely true either. Laurie G has established a policy that anything written and released recently is meant to specifically corroborate or extrapolate the new information. Hence why the new BT books were nothing like Helsreach. The BL editing team has taken over editing of the studio AND FW's releases as well to ensure continuity.

 

Edit: For instance, you aren't likely to see a novel released with Abaddon that has him worshipping Horus or conflicting with ADBs Abaddon nowadays like you would have five years ago.

[Legatus]

So you're basing that on the Dark Angels, the Chapter so covered up in lies that even members of the Inner Circle don't know the entire truth of Caliban. Well if that's what you want to do.

 

No, I am basing that on the Codex Dark Angels (or Codex Angels of Death), categorically the best example for how a Codex is not just presenting limited Imperial-point-of-view information, since it describes that Jonson is hidden deep inside the Rock, something which only the Emperor, no one else within the Imperium, not even the highest ranking Dark Angel Grand Master, is aware of.

 

 

Also, remind me how the Space Wolves Index Astartes article says the bit between Russ and the Lion came about?

 

The Space Wolves Index Astartes article does not mention the feud. In the 2nd Edition Codex Angels of Death, the first fight between Jonson and Russ is provoked by Jonson defeating a Warlord which Russ had claimed for himself, while dismissing the preliminary reconnaissance and planning the Dark Angels had already invested. In the 2nd Edition Codex Space Wolves the Dark Angels were described as having suddenly advanced and leaving the flank of the Space Wolves unprotected, leading to casualties. Though it was still mainly the humiliation of not being able to take the Warlord out by himself that prompted Russ to attack Jonson.

 

 

---

 

I'm saying we won't know if the comparisons between the Space Wolves and World Eaters are appropriate until we get the new FW background article in Inferno. You can't convict a man missing half the evidence.

 

We were told in recent books that Guilliman is ok with Russ (Unremembered Empire), but not with Angron (HH1: Betrayal). We were told that Russ had tried to rein in Angron (Betrayer). And we were told explicitely that the World Eaters were more violent and dreaded than the Space Wolves in the World Eaters' FW chapter (HH1: Betrayal).

 

Are you expecting the FW chapter on the Space Wolves to contradict all of that?

 

 

---

 

Different authors are also allowed to put their stamp on the Warhammer universe. You're citing stuff from Warhammer's past like any of those are actually verifiable accounts.

 

Well, I had described the retconning of the number of victory of the Space Wolves from "close to Horus" to "relatively few" as "serious". This was then contested, that the Index Astartes Space Wolves (oddly specific) did not mention any amount of victories at all. I would say providing the citation about the amount of victories is the appropriate reply.

[Marshal Rohr]

Russ didn't censure Angron because Angron was violent. Guilliman didn't dislike Angron because he was brutal (the guy crucified the rebels who killed his dad remembered?), Russ censured Angron and Guilliman objected to the World Eaters work because they were broken. The Butcher's Nails made it impossible for Angron and the World Eaters to perform their duties the way they were intended. This is clearly demonstrated in Betrayer. 

 

Edit: Also, I would not be surprised if when it comes to the Wolves actions comparable to the Eaters, the Wolves are going to be the 'right' kind of brutality, where the Eaters will be the 'wrong' kind because the Butcher's Nails is such a hindrance. This would all fit into the 'mirror image' theme that all legions have.

 

Edit Part II: Also, the story makes it clear the Wolves' brutal campaigns were sanctioned, while the World Eaters' campaigns were not always sanctioned. There were time when the Eaters went too far because of their defects, while the Wolves were meant to go that far from the outset. 

[Kol Saresk]

 

Different authors are also allowed to put their stamp on the Warhammer universe. You're citing stuff from Warhammer's past like any of those are actually verifiable accounts. The appeal of this fictional universe is that no account is more authoritative than another and everything in the universe is a rumor, mistake, offhand account, or forgotten text.

 

Jeez. Just looking at that list of cited sources scares me. How could anyone write anything in Warhammer if it had such strict canon? (See Star Wars for an example.)

This isn't entirely true either. Laurie G has established a policy that anything written and released recently is meant to specifically corroborate or extrapolate the new information. Hence why the new BT books were nothing like Helsreach. The BL editing team has taken over editing of the studio AND FW's releases as well to ensure continuity.

 

Edit: For instance, you aren't likely to see a novel released with Abaddon that has him worshipping Horus or conflicting with ADBs Abaddon nowadays like you would have five years ago.

Actually, you could. It just couldn't exist in the same time period as Talon of Horus. Ultimately it'd have to be in the Horus Heresy when Abaddon still worshipped Horus.

 

But what Laurie Goulding is doing, or trying to do, is make sure that some facts are universal. For example, Legion size. In A Thousand Sons, the XV are supposed to be ten thousand strong. That is already being retconned to become concurrent with FW's writing of the Salamanders being the smallest Legion at 80,000 IIRC. The first signs of which are in this very novella with there being Thousand Sons outposts when in A Thousand Sons, it was strongly implied the whole Legion was at Prospero, something that was simultaenously supported and contradicted by the older background.

 

However, there still exists the "point of view" element. For example, in Fallen Angels Nemiel is presented as someone who is highly valued by the Lion and the Lion himself is presented in a light that he might appear treacherous. But then you get Gav Thorpe's The Lion where Nemiel is only valued so long as he does not question the Lion's decision and the Lion himself is presented as an innocent victim who was duped by Perturabo.

 

This even continues on with Astelan with Ravenwing continuing on with his testimony to Boreas that he was just duped by Luther and that the Lion wasn't entirely loyal still being canon, meanwhile the same author presents Astelan in the Heresy as being a power hungry commander who is willing to kill even his own brothers if he thinks it will get him higher up the food chain.

 

As long as certain facts remain immutable, there still exists the ability to present those facts in various lights based on biased points of view. Even to the point that it'd make the facts look like lies. And then everything else that isn't strictly a fact is up in the air.

[Rob P]

I like the complexity that has been added to the Dark Angels.

 

Most legions have a pre-primarch identity, primarch-found identity and heresy identity. And these can be blurred to some extent.

 

The Dark Angels have these and the 'post-primarch discovery' marines that don't have a connection with their primarch and then, presumably, pro-Caliban marines that will develop later in the story.

 

I think it adds something interesting that now that the Lion's loyalties are fairly clear something else has been added to develop the story of the fallen. I like the idea that there is so much potential with the Dark Angels for factions and a complete lack of clarity of who is/was and isn't/wasn't loyal to the Emperor/the Lion.

 

The edge that the Dark Angels appear to have at present is that they don't appear to have transitioned from their 30k to 40k identity at the drop of a hat, whilst some other legions pretty much have.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

 

Different authors are also allowed to put their stamp on the Warhammer universe. You're citing stuff from Warhammer's past like any of those are actually verifiable accounts. The appeal of this fictional universe is that no account is more authoritative than another and everything in the universe is a rumor, mistake, offhand account, or forgotten text.

 

Jeez. Just looking at that list of cited sources scares me. How could anyone write anything in Warhammer if it had such strict canon? (See Star Wars for an example.)

This isn't entirely true either. Laurie G has established a policy that anything written and released recently is meant to specifically corroborate or extrapolate the new information. Hence why the new BT books were nothing like Helsreach. The BL editing team has taken over editing of the studio AND FW's releases as well to ensure continuity.

 

Edit: For instance, you aren't likely to see a novel released with Abaddon that has him worshipping Horus or conflicting with ADBs Abaddon nowadays like you would have five years ago.

Actually, you could. It just couldn't exist in the same time period as Talon of Horus. Ultimately it'd have to be in the Horus Heresy when Abaddon still worshipped Horus.

 

But what Laurie Goulding is doing, or trying to do, is make sure that some facts are universal. For example, Legion size. In A Thousand Sons, the XV are supposed to be ten thousand strong. That is already being retconned to become concurrent with FW's writing of the Salamanders being the smallest Legion at 80,000 IIRC. The first signs of which are in this very novella with there being Thousand Sons outposts when in A Thousand Sons, it was strongly implied the whole Legion was at Prospero, something that was simultaenously supported and contradicted by the older background.

 

However, there still exists the "point of view" element. For example, in Fallen Angels Nemiel is presented as someone who is highly valued by the Lion and the Lion himself is presented in a light that he might appear treacherous. But then you get Gav Thorpe's The Lion where Nemiel is only valued so long as he does not question the Lion's decision and the Lion himself is presented as an innocent victim who was duped by Perturabo.

 

This even continues on with Astelan with Ravenwing continuing on with his testimony to Boreas that he was just duped by Luther and that the Lion wasn't entirely loyal still being canon, meanwhile the same author presents Astelan in the Heresy as being a power hungry commander who is willing to kill even his own brothers if he thinks it will get him higher up the food chain.

 

As long as certain facts remain immutable, there still exists the ability to present those facts in various lights based on biased points of view. Even to the point that it'd make the facts look like lies. And then everything else that isn't strictly a fact is up in the air.

 

 

This is mostly the 'immutable' we are discussing here though, as you point out. 

[Kol Saresk]

Except Son of Carnellian was referring to Legatus using 2nd Edition background to support the Wolves victories being "comparable to Horus, but less than the Lion's", to try and support background that isn't even repeated in the latest edition of the Codex as he himself says. Which kind of contradicts the concept that the entirety of a Codex is an immutable fact free of bias since if that were true, then the most recent Codex would contain that information. And the next rendition of the Codex should also contain the events in the Legacy of Caliban series, something it probably won't do.

 

Also, I'm surprised no one is trying to point out that Dark Angels loyal to the Emperor and the Imperium but not the Lion fly in the face of how the Lutherite Fallen are defined in 40K background. What blasphemy! :P

[Rob P]

I don't see that something not being in a later codex means that the information is no longer correct. It's a better argument if the new codex contradicts the older codex.

 

Also, as I eluded to a few posts above, there is a lot of scope for a traitor faction of Dark Angels (presumably those directly under Luther at Caliban), but there is even more scope with the info in this novella for there to be a number of marines that are loyal to The Lion or the Emperor or whoever that are eventually labelled as Fallen. 

[Emperor's Furor]

Except Son of Carnellian was referring to Legatus using 2nd Edition background to support the Wolves victories being "comparable to Horus, but less than the Lion's", to try and support background that isn't even repeated in the latest edition of the Codex as he himself says. Which kind of contradicts the concept that the entirety of a Codex is an immutable fact free of bias since if that were true, then the most recent Codex would contain that information. And the next rendition of the Codex should also contain the events in the Legacy of Caliban series, something it probably won't do.

Also, I'm surprised no one is trying to point out that Dark Angels loyal to the Emperor and the Imperium but not the Lion fly in the face of how the Lutherite Fallen are defined in 40K background. What blasphemy!

Astelan said that and I totally agreed with him, the Dark Angels of 40k try to make out it's so cut and dry, luther was bad etc etc

[Kol Saresk]

I don't see that something not being in a later codex means that the information is no longer correct. It's a better argument if the new codex contradicts the older codex.

 

Also, as I eluded to a few posts above, there is a lot of scope for a traitor faction of Dark Angels (presumably those directly under Luther at Caliban), but there is even more scope with the info in this novella for there to be a number of marines that are loyal to The Lion or the Emperor or whoever that are eventually labelled as Fallen.

Typically, it is a sign of the information being phased out.

 

For example, the information we have on the First Black Crusade is that Abaddon and his forces spewed out of the Eye and caused untold carnage and then after claiming Drach'nyen, Abaddon left and any who did not follow him were destroyed in the Imperial counterattack. Following this, the Emperor himself ordered the fortifications of Cadia.

 

Now, this account is as old as 2nd Edition and has never once been contradicted, mostly because the following accounts of the First Black Crusade simply say that Abaddon came and then left after claiming Drach'nyen. The only other time time this account has even been repeated was by Inquisitor Czevak in Atlas Infernal and even he preceded it with "And some say".

 

But obviously this account cannot be true, since everything since 3rd Edition states that the Emperor has been sitting catatonic, if not dead, on the Golden Throne ever since he was struck down by Horus.

 

So while there are no contradictory accounts of the First Black Crusade, it is still obvious that the account itself cannot be entirely true since certain aspects would have to be based on Imperial mythology since facts state the Emperor was in no condition to order the fortification of Cadia.

 

Yet we can pretty much that Black Legion will directly contradict this in some manner or another since it will be a first-hand account(with all the bias that comes with such) rather than a "history book perspective" based on myth, bias and some facts.

[Legatus]

Russ didn't censure Angron because Angron was violent. Guilliman didn't dislike Angron because he was brutal (the guy crucified the rebels who killed his dad remembered?), Russ censured Angron and Guilliman objected to the World Eaters work because they were broken. The Butcher's Nails made it impossible for Angron and the World Eaters to perform their duties the way they were intended. This is clearly demonstrated in Betrayer.

 

The nails were a problem because they made the World Eaters so violent. And Guilliman was very much opposed to the brutal conduct in general.

 

"The Ultramarine had heard stories from his fellow Legionnaires about the so called ''cleansing'' of Ariggata, one of the World Eaters'

more infamous battle actions. The Legion's assault on the citadel there had reputably left a charnel house in its wake. Cestus knew full

well that Guilliman still sought a reckoning with his brother primarch, Angron, concerning the dire events of that mission, but this was

no time for recrimination."

- Battle for the Abyss

 

"The World Eaters had become a byword for unbridled violence and slaughter on a grand scale, shunned by many of their fellow Legions for their excesses and whispered of in fear by those who in theory they had been created to protect. (...)

(...) more than once non-compliant planetary systems surrendered wholesale at the rumour of the World Eater's approach, so potent had their bloody legend grown.

With this legend came dark tales of atrocity and wanton destruction that froze the blood of even the hardened Imperial Commanders and caused concern even at the level of the War Council and the other Primarchs. Not least of their detractors was Roboute Guilliman, who fought beside Angron and his Legion during the Cleansing of Ariggata and saw first hand the bloodbath they had left in the wake of their attack on the Basalt Citadel, where the last resistance of this non-compliant human world had made their last stand. Guilliman had seen the ramp of World Eaters corpses that had been used to finally mount a breach in the mighty fortress and the vengeful horror the Space Marines had wrought within and been sickened."

- HH1: Betrayal, p. 88

 

So far no brain implants mentioned. The World Eaters were feared beyond the borders of the Imperium not because they were not towing the line or "their actions were not sanctioned". The Nails were a problem because it turned the World Eaters into mindless butchers. The butchery being the crucial element.

 

"The World Eaters, once known for their brotherhood, became known first and foremost for their savagery. Reports began filtering back of excessive Legion casualties in tacticless displays of horde warfare, and Imperial Army forces pleading for assistance from other Legions when the World Eaters were the ones to answer the call. Planets surrendered rather than face the XII Legion in battle, but not all who surrendered were spared the war. The Nails dulled all other pleasures, until the heady bite of adrenaline was the only certain way to experience anything but the dimmest memory of emotion. Their rewired minds allowed no other pleasure beyond battle.

Worlds bled. Worlds burned. Worlds died.

The Emperor, it was said, had become… how had rumour put it? Displeased. What a word. So polite, considering the madness that followed in its wake.

(...)

‘Reports reach my ears, Angron. The words of commanders and captains who have suffered at your side. Soldiers forced to fight without orders, losing hundreds when mere dozens needed to die. Your own allies speak of the butchery done to them at your sons’ hands. Report after report after report, witness after witness after witness. All of this comes to me, and I wonder, my brother: what am I to do?’"

(...)

Russ spoke again, pale eyes unwavering. ‘The surgery must end, Angron. The Emperor himself wills that it be so. The massacres end here and now, as well. Look what you have done to this world.’

‘Cleansed it.’

‘Butchered it. Reaved it. Ghenna is scoured of all life. Is this a deed you want listed beneath your name when statues rise to celebrate the Great Crusade?’

- Betrayer

 

That just doesn't sound like coming from someone who leads his Legion to commit even more brutal atrocities.

 

 

---

 

Except Son of Carnellian was referring to Legatus using 2nd Edition background to support the Wolves victories being "comparable to Horus, but less than the Lion's", to try and support background that isn't even repeated in the latest edition of the Codex as he himself says. Which kind of contradicts the concept that the entirety of a Codex is an immutable fact free of bias since if that were true, then the most recent Codex would contain that information.

 

The 3rd Edition Codices contained barely any lore at all. That did not meant that all the lore of 2nd Edition had been declared obsolete, it just meant that you had to look elsewhere for the lore. The 4th Edition Codices started to include more lore, and the 5th Edition Codices were basically back at the level of the 2nd Edition Codices. The 6th Edition Codices were comparable to the 5th Edition Codices, with perhaps slightly less lore content, and the 7th Edition Codices contain only very brief descriptions, compared to the page long chapters of 2nd and 5th Edition.

 

The account of 'The Lion and the Wolf' in the 2nd Edition Codex Angels of Death filled almost an entire page of the Codex (and that with a smaller font). The account in the 7th Edition Codex Dark Angels is about 25% of that in length. Of course it will contain less information.

[DuskRaider]

The Wolves are no where near as brutal or destructive as the Eaters of Worlds. It has nothing to do with the Nails, they were just as efficiently bloodthirsty under the War Hounds moniker as they were post-Angron's discovery. The Wolves are disciplined. The Blood XIIth are madmen in Power Armour.

[Marshal Rohr]

What are you going to say when FW manages to find a way to make the Wolves more brutal? I dont have the wolves info, no one does. The world eaters chopped people up into bits and were really good at it. The Wolves did things like crash a moon into a planet, which to date, no other legion has done. You've got the Division Kill guy talking about how scary they are, and iirc he mentions the WE but I may be wrong.

 

My point is to relax. It doesn't matter until the Wolves stuff comes out. It's pointless to declare it one way or the other.

[Kol Saresk]

What are you going to say when FW manages to find a way to make the Wolves more brutal? I dont have the wolves info, no one does. The world eaters chopped people up into bits and were really good at it. The Wolves did things like crash a moon into a planet, which to date, no other legion has done. You've got the Division Kill guy talking about how scary they are, and iirc he mentions the WE but I may be wrong.

Wait, what's this about crashing a moon into a planet?

[Marshal Rohr]

The Space Wolves dropped the Quietude Space Station moon into the ice shield.