Morality in 40K Writing

[Bonestomper]

For Hollywood writing, morality is key. You need an underdog to root for against the bad guys. In TV writing, morally ambiguous characters are the flavor of the month. So, how does one go about 40K writing? Is satire an option (a la Neumeir's Starship Troopers)? Or is the key to just treat the Imperium like they're the good guys and be as sincere about it as possible (a la The Iron Dream)?

[Tyriks]

I think you can see this in some of the better authors at BL. The Imperium are not really the good guys, they're just not the worst guys, and some authors show this very well by juxtaposing their belief in their righteousness and their absolute resolve that they are the good guys with the actual fact of their deeds. For example, in False Gods, Loken kills civilians for getting in his way when Horus is wounded, and doesn't even consider this to be an issue until much later when a civilian friend accuses him. And he is on the more compassionate side of things! I think using tools like that to explore morality work very well in this setting.

[bluntblade]

It varies by faction, Chapter, even character in some cases. Satire strikes me as a difficult one to pull off in the setting, unless it's internal to the broader story

[Bonestomper]

I think you can see this in some of the better authors at BL. The Imperium are not really the good guys, they're just not the worst guys, and some authors show this very well by juxtaposing their belief in their righteousness and their absolute resolve that they are the good guys with the actual fact of their deeds. For example, in False Gods, Loken kills civilians for getting in his way when Horus is wounded, and doesn't even consider this to be an issue until much later when a civilian friend accuses him. And he is on the more compassionate side of things! I think using tools like that to explore morality work very well in this setting.

In terms of the utilitarian approach of viewing them as the not-worst-guys, I guess it's kind of like what people say about writing gangster movies...

[Kelborn]

Concerning morality, is there a line which is forbidden to cross?

 

For example, write something about children which are used for a ritual? Never read something like this before and to be honest, I would struggle if someone would use something like this.

 

I know that warhammer is all about being grim dark and there are no truely good guys out there but does the setting have restrictions?

[mc warhammer]

Concerning morality, is there a line which is forbidden to cross?

 

For example, write something about children which are used for a ritual? Never read something like this before and to be honest, I would struggle if someone would use something like this.

 

I know that warhammer is all about being grim dark and there are no truely good guys out there but does the setting have restrictions?

in one of the night lords books, i vaguely remember a specific scene with a child being killed during a planet wide massacre and there was some ritual torture afterwords, though i'm not sure children were utilised in that.

 

it seems to me that if 40k didn't approach chaos and hell with the full horror of what it is capable of, then it would be a lying to the audience.

 

i imagine the rules aren't that different to most horror: it's not what you depict but how you depict it. so far 40k has remained within the realms of taste (in my experience) with the most horrible things being implied or left open rather than exploited for entertainment.

[JH79]

This is such an interesting thread!

 

40k seems to epitomize the grey line between right and wrong, depending on who's eye's you see events unfold. In the Horus Heresy i am very much a loyalist, but in 40k sometimes i have no idea who to route for other than the Emperor! It could be said the Imperium is responsible for just as much human suffering as the forces of Chaos / The Black Legion etc...

 

What i cannot get past though is the fact that there are no limits to Chaos / the traitor legions... human suffering is Top of the Pops and the only gain is whatever insanity drives the creators of said suffering. I'm currently re-listening to Pharos and am having more trouble with it the second time through than the first. The Nightlords are such sickeningly horrific characters and their deeds so abhorrent that i cannot truly enjoy the story. How anyone can get behind such characters, whether in 30k or 40k i have no idea.

 

This concept was put to the test a little in TMoM when i got to the 1k souls sacrifice... men, women, children... all sacrificed so He could leave the golden throne. Evil. But who drove the need for such a deed? Not The Emperor, his hands are clean for without that sacrifice everyone loses, he just had the stomach for it. Ultimately it comes back to the traitor legions / Chaos.

 

Imagine how The First Heretic would have been received if the true deeds of Chaos influence were shown in all their gory detail. Would anyone have given two hoots about Argel Tal where between scenes he despises the "truth" the legion must bear quickly followed by his active dismemberment and torture of a young virgin so he can commune with Lorgar / stop the Aquilon messaging The Emperor. I don't think so.

 

It's a tricky business but there must be some set in stone guidelines the authors have to follow. At the end of the day it's about telling a good story and not getting too lost in the detail.

[Bonestomper]

Yeah, I guess my concern as an aspiring Black Library writer is how to get the reader to root for the main character - 'cause traditional approaches wouldn't be true to the grimdark setting. And so I'm left with no one to root for in many BL books; don't get me wrong, I love them, but just 'cause I'm a geek for the details, not because they're particularly emotionally engaging.

[DarkChaplain]

Concerning morality, is there a line which is forbidden to cross?

 

For example, write something about children which are used for a ritual? Never read something like this before and to be honest, I would struggle if someone would use something like this.

 

I know that warhammer is all about being grim dark and there are no truely good guys out there but does the setting have restrictions?

 

Wolf Mother by Graham McNeill, sequel to Vengeful Spirit. And then there's the abused choirboy in A Song for the Lost by Robbie MacNiven, though not with a ritual.

[bluntblade]

Argel Tal presides over the ritual sacrifice of dozens of astropaths to prevent Aquillon and co from getting their reports to the Emperor. He despises the practice (even as Xaphen takes unnerving pride in it) and punishes himself by watching the unfortunate each time until their mind gives out.

[The Unseen]

Umm.... 40k is satire. Like... All of it. Now, its pretty good satire, so it "works" if you take it seriously, but its incredibly over the top and cartoonishly grim-dark when you do. I enjoy this, But I never forget that it was written as satire, by a bunch of British dudes who were probably heavily influenced by their distaste of the "facist-light" of Thatcherism at the time. 40k borrows heavily from starship troopers, well, among the literal dozens of things it borrows from. Old school satire, so "in-universe" it's played straight, and the reader is supposed to look at it from their perspective and "get the joke" so to speak.

 

In universe, there are no good guys. The Imperium is just the least terrible overall, as their goals are decent, the preservation of Humanity as a whole, just take the ends justify the means philosophy to their logical amoral conclusion. And in universe, it sorta mostly holds up, as being hyper-xenophobic when Xenos are aliens that in most cases wish for and work towards the extinction of mankind isn't a terrible over-reaction. But its still satire of facism, nationalism, and religious fanaticism.

[HeritorA]

 

Concerning morality, is there a line which is forbidden to cross?

 

For example, write something about children which are used for a ritual? Never read something like this before and to be honest, I would struggle if someone would use something like this.

 

I know that warhammer is all about being grim dark and there are no truely good guys out there but does the setting have restrictions?

 

Wolf Mother by Graham McNeill, sequel to Vengeful Spirit. And then there's the abused choirboy in A Song for the Lost by Robbie MacNiven, though not with a ritual.

 

Add to that in no small part a 'Deathwatch' novel from Steve Parker (that one which definitely want to be an 'R') :)  And 1 scene in 'Shadowsword'  - did you forget It DC?

[Kelborn]

Ok, there are some scenes with children. I got it. ^^

 

It was more of an example if there are any restrictions set by BL or GW concerning moral or brutality or however you'd call it.

[helterskelter]

You're not likely to find the details from a serial killer biography within a black library novel at all.

The most you get is a glancing overview, "the screams began as the knife pierced the flesh" but beyond that there's nothing anywhere near the brutality of pee wee gaskins and others

[HeritorA]

You're not likely to find the details from a serial killer biography within a black library novel at all.

The most you get is a glancing overview, "the screams began as the knife pierced the flesh" but beyond that there's nothing anywhere near the brutality of pee wee gaskins and others

we do not want to cripple teenagers psyche

[Gree]

We do already have protagonists who are the more sympathetic examples of their group don't we?

 

Gaunt and Cain are Commissars who don't shoot their own men and even tolerate minor insubordination and heresy from their troopers. They're not exactly what you would imagine from reading the blurb in the Astra Militarum Codex.

 

Pedro Kantor goes out of his way to rescue innocent civilians despite it being a tactical disadvantage for him and Tu'Shan even get's into a fistifght with the Marines Malevolent Captain over him killing civilians.

[Runefyre]

We do already have protagonists who are the more sympathetic examples of their group don't we?

 

Gaunt and Cain are Commissars who don't shoot their own men and even tolerate minor insubordination and heresy from their troopers. They're not exactly what you would imagine from reading the blurb in the Astra Militarum Codex.

 

Pedro Kantor does out of his way to rescue innocent civilians despite it being a tactical disadvantage for him and Tu'Shan even get's into a fistifght with the Marines Malevolent Captain over him killing civilians.

You can add Shrike to that list as well.

[Olis]

Morality in 40k... geez that's quite the topic. Where does anyone start? As The Unseen has already mentioned, there's a heavy dose of satire in the DNA of the 40k universe. Because of what it satirises, 40k is a brutal dystopia with much of humanity toiling under variously vicious or incompetent overlords, insignificant on the galactic stage as transhuman super-warriors and the other myriad arms of service for the Imperium fight back the coming night that will, eventually and irrevocably, be the end of the Empire of Man.

 

Suitably, the supposed morals involved swing between grey and black, even if many of the storied heroes buck the trend in one way or another. The setting of the 41st millennium is clearly dystopic with war a constant effort somewhere or another in the Imperium (and has been for quite some time). Technology is regressing locally and galactically as the residing 'guardians of information' (the Adeptus Mechanicus) lose knowledge only to replace it with dogma and superstition. Psykers are a clear and present danger to the populace, as unsanctioned ones can be undoubtedly a danger to everyone - if their powers are not an immediate threat then the possibility of becoming a conduit in which daemons can appear at literally any second may very well be (and let's not forget those awful psychneueins, while we're here...). These things and many others (such as the more 'regular' dangers of work hazards, crime, oppression, pogroms, purges and plain old insurrection) means that most citizens, even if there is no war to worry about, are not likely to live long and prosperous lives.

 

Let's not forget Imperial culture itself. Have you seen the skulls everywhere and the Gothic architecture adorned with statues and gargoyles? This is a society that has to contend with death and supernatural occurrences incredibly often. We have Saints - those many, many, many soldiers, preachers, tinkers, tailors and what have you that are venerated (usually for martyrdom) everywhere, local and galaxy-wide. We have the Emperor himself, an ever-living martyr that consumes a thousand souls a day just to stay alive and the dead-but-not-dead god of the Imperium. Millions die every day to keep the Imperium a contiguous entity, fighting the enemy within, without and beyond. The culture itself is morbid. Hence the skulls plastered everywhere, the servo-skulls doing whatever trivial task is needed of them and the many doctrines/dogmas/edicts that seem, to you and me, extreme. Often, the order of the day may be to do whatever is necessary to get the job done or perhaps it's to turn a blind eye to the suffering and atrocities done in the name of the Emperor, if only to maintain the status quo. 

 

Life in the Imperium is cheap. Very cheap. The trillions upon trillions of subjects that the Imperium must govern are, if one were to be pessimistic, a potential threat themselves. Rebellion, defection and simple civil disturbance can't be all that uncommon. Life in the Imperium sucks for the vast majority of mankind. Added to this is the very real and very dangerous threat of the Ruinous Powers and the Traitor Legions. For the Imperium this is very much a protracted grudge match to the death with no holds barred. Collateral damage and casualties are par for the course. No-one cares for the average Joe caught in the crossfire when an Inquisitor wipes out a planet to contain a warp incursion. There are bigger concerns than that. And the setting usually reflects this.

 

Whereas the individual tragedies and triumphs make for compelling reading, the movers and shakers generally are more detached and potentially more callous. Characters that see the horrors on a regular basis might very well be stripped of their so-called humanity and become monsters themselves. Others can, and do, go mad. Others still power through the awfulness either through ideals, sheer willpower or just bloody mindedness. Perhaps they are the ones that can and do perpetrate atrocities (Commissar Kowle, anyone?).  

 

The depths at which some will go to maintain the Imperium is perhaps most evident in radical inquisitors. Quixos, to name one, was utterly convinced he had the right of matters, even up to the point when he was hunted down and executed by a cabal of his peers. But where does radicalism and outright heresy end and begin? There is much of an overlap, with many deciding for themselves (or being told by others with more power) where that line is. Each could argue with those that disagree until the cows come home. Without a doubt, though, most inquisitors work for the best outcome that their ideology prefers. Even if the results include the death of millions to achieve it.  

[Marshal Rohr]

Umm.... 40k is satire. Like... All of it. Now, its pretty good satire, so it "works" if you take it seriously, but its incredibly over the top and cartoonishly grim-dark when you do. I enjoy this, But I never forget that it was written as satire, by a bunch of British dudes who were probably heavily influenced by their distaste of the "facist-light" of Thatcherism at the time. 40k borrows heavily from starship troopers, well, among the literal dozens of things it borrows from. Old school satire, so "in-universe" it's played straight, and the reader is supposed to look at it from their perspective and "get the joke" so to speak.

 

In universe, there are no good guys. The Imperium is just the least terrible overall, as their goals are decent, the preservation of Humanity as a whole, just take the ends justify the means philosophy to their logical amoral conclusion. And in universe, it sorta mostly holds up, as being hyper-xenophobic when Xenos are aliens that in most cases wish for and work towards the extinction of mankind isn't a terrible over-reaction. But its still satire of facism, nationalism, and religious fanaticism.

 

Its all the rage to call lots of things fascist these days, even when none of them are actually fascist. The Imperium is not a fascist system, because fascism requires a very top down, centralized system of law and government redistribution of resources. The Imperium is none of that. It is feudal, and power is more frequently of the absolute variety than a rule of law, but just being a dictatorship, aristocracy, and oligarchy doesn't make something fascist. It can't be nationalist anymore that its possible for someone to be a 'human nationalist', because the Imperium is made up of millions and millions of ethnic groups and nations. Religious fanaticism is the only one you could make a reasonable claim to, but even then its rare for anyone in the Imperium to be vehemently religious. Only certain factions are rabidly religious.  The novel Starship Troopers is not a satire, at all. The movie was a typical 90's shallow social commentary, but the novel, when read with Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Stranger in a Strange Land, were the author's attempt to convey his views of government and politics and he said as much in interviews. Humanity has only lived under a system we view in our modernity as moral since, like... the Magna Carta at best. It has always, and WILL always default to warlordism, tribalism, and strongmen when placed in a survival scenario. The Imperium is always in a life or death struggle, so naturally its a rigid, authoritarian system. The Imperium is amoral, because all states are amoral. They can be led the righteous or the immoral, but the state and its feudal principalities' only goal is perpetuating the continued existence of the state. 

 

I can see the argument that the art takes cues from satirical interpretations of fascism, nihilism, and all the other -isms that get thrown at things that are supposed to be bad, but functional the Imperium is not a fascist system. Sure the Death Korps look like Nazis, Valhallans and Vostroyans look like Imperial and Soviet Russians, the Tallarn pull from the early lives of the Ba'athist dictators, but all that is detached from what actually makes something fascist. The Empire in Star Wars wears black leather and has stormtroopers, but its very much an Imperial system, and not a fascist one either. I mean that could change tomorrow with a new novel, but until I see the high lords role out five years plans for agriculture and directories for war production, its still too decentralized to be an effectively fascist system. 

[RobMac]

 

Concerning morality, is there a line which is forbidden to cross?

 

For example, write something about children which are used for a ritual? Never read something like this before and to be honest, I would struggle if someone would use something like this.

 

I know that warhammer is all about being grim dark and there are no truely good guys out there but does the setting have restrictions?

 

Wolf Mother by Graham McNeill, sequel to Vengeful Spirit. And then there's the abused choirboy in A Song for the Lost by Robbie MacNiven, though not with a ritual.

 

Red Tithe will also feature the Night Lords doing cruel stuff to a teenager. You'd think they were sadists or something...

[Bonestomper]

Maybe the solution, from a writer's POV, is the George R. R. Martin approach. Instead of focusing on the Imperium, I'd like to (in my fan/aspirational fiction) show things from two or more POVs (e.g. standard Imperium authoritarian, us-versus-them, utilitarian propaganda; Orks reacting to the same and laughing at it; Tyranids feeling they have just as much right to a "manifest destiny" and taking issue at humanity's hypocritical genocides, etc.). And then you'd have a back-and-forth of human atrocities leading to Tau ones and vice versa. A one-upmanship game of who can be most evil (AKA "war").

 

That way, I'd be true to the grimdark setting while still having engaging characters that you feel for - due to the mutual atrocities of the Other.

 

Does anyone know if any BL writers already take that approach? I've read quite a bit, but by no means everything...

[Marshal Rohr]

I dont think the term genocide is applicable when talking about the Imperium purging a world for disloyalty or taint. Genocide typically has a racial characteristic to it. 

[Bonestomper]

No, no - you're right. I guess I just mean that, to the degree that the author's not dead (in the sense of that other thread in this forum), the Imperium's xenocide was used as allegory for genocide.

[Tyriks]

I dont think the term genocide is applicable when talking about the Imperium purging a world for disloyalty or taint. Genocide typically has a racial characteristic to it.

 

Genocide doesn't mean racial genocide, that's just the most common usage in the real world. Genocide is just targeted extermination of a specific group, so killing a planet would qualify.

[Marshal Rohr]

The use of gen- as the prefix and its historical applications just tie it inextricably with racial targeted extermination and it reads as such to casual viewer. In the same way racism is still used to describe ethnocentric belief systems and isn't scientifically accurate way to describe people, since the human race is all encompassing.